Political and judicial pressure is intensifying on several fronts, with Donald Trump at the center of the international spotlight while key cases that affect political and judicial figures advance in Spain.
Trump and the escalation of international tension
The first thing is the situation of trump. Continuously looking for enemies so that as little as possible is said about the situation in Iran. He has once again threatened to take control of Cuba quickly. He has spoken again about tariffs on the EU. Now of 25% for the automotive sector in another blow to Chancellor Merz for saying that Iran is humiliating him. And he has announced the withdrawal of five thousand American soldiers from Germany and warns that he could do so with more, also in Italy and Spain.
This had not been foreseen by his pet, NATO Secretary General Rutte, who asked for explanations but quickly said that Europe has to invest more in Defense. Everything in order.
At home, in the United States, is where Trump’s problems are increasing. With the gasoline price skyrocketed and the Republican criticism in crescendo – the Democratic ones, of course – because the sixty days in which the president can be at war without authorization from Congress have already been exceeded.
There is the possibility of an extension of thirty more days but what Defense Minister Hegseth and Trump himself have been defending since last week is that since a ceasefire has been in force since April 7, the US is no longer at war with Iran. That we have to stop the counter. No matter how much the US army is deployed in the area.
Last night in an interview on NBC, Attorney General Blanche repeated this same idea when journalist Kristen Welker asked him if the US was at war with Iran.
“No, what President Trump said this weekend is absolutely true. My job as acting attorney general is to make sure that the president, and all of us, do the right thing within the legal framework, and we certainly are doing that.” There is a open legal debate about whether or not Trump is really following the law and whether the War Powers Act can be stopped. Or if a ceasefire means the cessation of the war itself.
Ábalos declaration and the mask case
At ten in the morning it is the turn to Abalos. Two years and three months have passed since the former minister said on this program that the masks were the parrot’s chocolate. That day he said that there was no blanket to throw away and that it was not a time bomb for anyone. Understanding Pedro Sánchez and the PSOE like no one else, of which he was organization secretary for four years.
That February 28, he said here that he was not afraid of what Koldo, then detained, might say because he had behaved well with him.
Thursday Koldo Garcia He corroborated that idea by saying that it is a good thing to be born to be grateful. And he stood up for his former boss, explaining that on many occasions he did things without Ábalos knowing. Offering him the alibi for today that he didn’t know anything.
Nothing about the commissions, nothing about the plugs to Jessica, nothing about the jokes with which the PSOE paid according to Koldo and against what the former manager and the party leadership maintain.
In the three weeks since the trial we have seen how coordinated the defense strategy of Koldo and Ábalos was. With these premises it does not seem that today’s session is going to be a big surprise. In the absence of what the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office has to say.
Other judicial fronts: Kitchen and García Ortiz
Important session also today at the National Court where the trial of the Kitchen. Today’s turn for Commissioner Villarejo’s archenemy and former director of the CNI Félix Sánz Roldán. That he will respond to Bárcenas’ accusations that intelligence personnel monitored him while he was in provisional prison during 2013.
The former manager accused Soraya Sáenz de Santamaría of giving the order, something she denied.
AND Alvaro Garcia Ortiz. Interviewed by Évole half a year after being sentenced for revealing confidential data to two years of disqualification as responsible for the leak of González Amador’s confidential emails.
Repeating everything he already declared in the trial in which he was convicted. And therefore, defending himself again. He continues to deny that the leak came from the Attorney General’s Office. And he continues to maintain that he was convicted in a press release, in general terms.
He states that he did not resign because he thought he would be acquitted and points to the judges of the Second Chamber who tried him. What’s more, it states that this Supreme Court room has a excessive power.
He once again justifies deleting his cell phone on the same day of his accusation because he says he can do whatever he wants with his privacy. And in reality they had already warned him before that they were going to charge him.
And you wonder who has gained from the process. The judicial truth, it is assumed. Now comes Conde Pumpido’s turn.
