We got a good result in the prosecution’s trial.

In the courtroom that tried him, the first thing the state attorney general said without a toga was, “I’m the state attorney general.” Come. You can also leave your clothes on for this purpose. That custom does not make monks, it makes government appointments. … and your unconditional support. It was clear that Álvaro García Ortiz was a man who valued hierarchy. I think the higher you go, the more you protect them. I’m fine. He did so clearly when he accused Almudena Lastra, a senior public prosecutor of the Community of Madrid, of having “grievances” against him. Or towards his position. In him, everything is the same, whether there is hell or not. “I”. García Ortiz blamed his subordinates during the trial…for not answering the phone right away! “It was very difficult to understand a situation where the prosecutor received five or six calls from the Attorney General and did not answer.As he did not answer, I had to tell him on WhatsApp: “It is essential to get the grade.” I also thought journalists were the only ones who had impatient bosses. Of course, the prosecutor’s office turned out to be a news organization. That said, not everyone agrees on how to get the information, but do we still need a style manual? No. It is a hierarchical organization and there is no debate.

Given public outrage, what about civilian outrage? – I am concerned that there will be a debate in this country about whether it should be an independent judge who directs the instructions or whether it should be the prosecutor, as you have already seen. Pure jurisprudence for congressmen on Garcia Ortiz. See what I said in the title? You can get some good stuff from here.

The other thing is that the court case has shown that there is no legal basis here. That’s no small thing. I was worried that the idea would permeate that Machiavelli was winning the war against misinformation. Our democracy is based on the opposite: the ends do not justify the means. But we risked breaking it. How confused we are about the importance of fighting misinformation. The real risk of allowing a clean slate in the event of a breach. But that’s not the case. In court, it is clear to everyone that there is a crime here. Because we often puff up our sleeves to fight back against misinformation, but no one here will say, “That was me.” What is left for us? You’re either a hero or you’re not. Seeing contradiction is a gift to everyone. For example, imagine that one day you have to negotiate with the prosecutor’s office. If we are all clear that there can be no leaks, we guarantee that our events will not be broadcast. Well, neither you nor I are famous. But no one knows if someday we will connect with politicians…

They will say that I am naive and that this oral hearing is a spectacle that will do untold damage to democracy. I’ll up the ante. It would have been better not to even go to trial.

Session limit reached

• Access to premium content is made available to the public courtesy of the institution it belongs to, but there are currently too many users logged in at once. Please try again in a few minutes.

Please try again

Session limit exceeded

• Only three sessions can be started at a time. Now that you have closed the oldest session, you can continue to browse the remaining sessions without any restrictions.

Continue browsing