{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Meu site jur\u00eddico","provider_url":"https:\/\/meusitejuridico.com.br","author_name":"Rodrigo Leite","author_url":"https:\/\/meusitejuridico.com.br\/author\/rodrigoleiterodrigoleite\/","title":"Boletim de Jurisprud\u00eancia do TCU n. 366 - Meu site jur\u00eddico","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"1zblPAV1Um\"><a href=\"https:\/\/meusitejuridico.com.br\/2021\/08\/16\/boletim-de-jurisprudencia-tcu-n-366\/\">Boletim de Jurisprud\u00eancia do TCU n. 366<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/meusitejuridico.com.br\/2021\/08\/16\/boletim-de-jurisprudencia-tcu-n-366\/embed\/#?secret=1zblPAV1Um\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"&#8220;Boletim de Jurisprud\u00eancia do TCU n. 366&#8221; &#8212; Meu site jur\u00eddico\" data-secret=\"1zblPAV1Um\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/meusitejuridico.com.br\/s.meusitejuridico\/2020\/03\/75bb7fb9-library-585002-640.jpg","thumbnail_width":640,"thumbnail_height":289,"description":"&#8211; Quando constatada a ado\u00e7\u00e3o de medidas corretivas e tempestivas para sanear a irregularidade, bem como a aus\u00eancia de les\u00e3o ao er\u00e1rio, deve-se considerar tais atenuantes em favor do respons\u00e1vel, podendo o TCU, inclusive, deixar de aplicar as penalidades estabelecidas na Lei n. 8.443\/1992, em vista do disposto no art. 22, \u00a7 2\u00ba, da LINDB [&hellip;]"}