Video transcript
Assista à entrevista exclusiva da RECORD com Ronaldo Caiado (PSD), candidato à Presidência
113 statements · 1 politicians · September 7, 2026 · 12 min
Statements by Ronaldo Caiado. 113 transcribed statements, with topic and stance on the ones the analysis classified. Topics: Judiciary, Institutions, National Security, Violence Against Women and Protection.
Speakers
Click any statement beside the video to jump straight to the moment it was said.
Transcript
113 statementsFull transcript of the video. Statements the analysis classified carry topic and stance.
Desconhecido
2026 elections, and we continue the series of interviews with the candidates for the Presidency of the Republic.
Desconhecido
Ronaldo Caiado, the PSD candidate, spoke with Jornal da Record anchor Mariana Godoy.
Desconhecido
And the topics are those that interest all of us.
Desconhecido
Public security, social programs, strategies to combat femicide, and the instability among justices of the STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal).
Desconhecido
Check it out.
Desconhecido
Domingo Espetacular interviews candidate Ronaldo Caiado today.
Desconhecido
Thank you very much, candidate, for your interview here at Record today.
I thank you, Mariana, for this opportunity here on Record TV.
at such a special moment, on a spectacular Sunday, being able to speak to millions and millions of people.
Desconhecido
Candidate, I would like to ask about the Federal Police investigations into Banco Master and businessman Daniel Vorcaro, currently detained, which have had new developments, including the revelation of relationships and exchanges of messages with Justice Alexandre de Moraes of the STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal).
Desconhecido
In addition, Daniel Vorcaro was also received by Justice André Mendonça.
- Neutral
Desconhecido
About: investigate possible biases of STF ministers
Do you support that the Public Ministry and the Senate... open formal investigations into the conduct of the justices of the STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal)?
- Neutral
Desconhecido
About: define limits of presidential action in inquiries involving members of higher courts
Or, as President of the Republic, what will be the limit of your institutional action regarding inquiries involving members of higher courts?
About: summon presidents of other branches to address inquiries involving STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal) members
As President of the Republic, of course I will call the head of any branch of government should similar situations occur, so that action can be taken immediately.
Because the whole problem is when you undermine moral authority.
It's when you cause the public to lose faith in the constituted powers.
The difference between democracy and barbarism is that democracy has rules.
You have to observe the dignity and formalities of the office.
You have to be aware of the role you occupy.
You cannot be involved in scandals because that... discredits you from holding your position.
And that is how I have held every office in my life, aware of the limits.
And I believe that the STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal) is also, at this moment, going through a delicate time and needs to give an explanation to the public.
About: require STF (Supreme Federal Tribunal) ministers to present their defense outside the STF plenary
And the solution is precisely to request that he actually mount his defense outside the STF's premises and that the other powers, indeed, such as the Federal Senate and the ordinary judiciary, continue advancing in... throughout the entire investigative process.
Desconhecido
In Brasília, especially this week, it was also reported that in Daniel Vorcaro's plea bargain proposal he stated that Gilberto Kassab, who is his running mate for vice president, mediated a 5 million donation as a kickback operator from Banco Master to Tarcísio de Freitas and Jair Bolsonaro.
Desconhecido
Kassab is also president of the PSD.
Desconhecido
How would this affect your campaign?
Look, first because Kassab already had the opportunity to respond to all of this at a press conference he held.
So, first of all, he was not supporting Bolsonaro.
Secondly, Tarcísio was not going to need him.
And that he has never been with that person.
So, the need to prove it is one thing; an allegation is another; phone calls and message exchanges are yet another.
They are distinct situations.
There is no fact that proves it.
Both Tarcísio has already denied it, and Caçaba himself has also denied the fact.
So, these things cannot be understood solely from what is said.
What we are judging in the case of Minister Alexandre Moraes is the wording of a contract; it is a contract that existed.
The inquiries that were made by phone to the minister.
So, they are totally different situations.
Double standards.
Desconhecido
Did you build it?
AI classification from the transcript of a public video. See the Methodology