Well, it's our right to distrust what's printed, just as it's our right to distrust what the White House spokespeople say. We have to weigh up probabilities. Personally, having already heard Trump denigrate McCain for having been captured and then deny he did so (despite video evidence), I think it's perfectly plausible.
The members were elected by the people. I just told you that.
You disliking the ruling doesn't make it a breach. And you've not come up with anything more substantial than your dislike.
OK, let's address it.
I do not agree with those stipulations in the Constitution; I think they're grotesque, and should be repealed. Those stipulations are also the law. The law is not right.
Y'see how we're able to separate our views on the morality of the matter from its legality? They're totally different things.
You have a personal dislike for what Morales did. But factually, legally, it's not a breach. The law was not broken. You can say the law was wrong to allow it, but you can't say the law was broken.
He factually didn't break the Constitution. The Constitution established the Plurinational Constitutional Court as the highest court, with the final say on the matter, and the court sided with him.
There's a more compelling argument to be made that he broke trust with the people, by holding a referendum and then disregarding the result.
