Let whoever falls fall (unless it's Marlaska)

The cases of sexual assault allegations affecting politics are giving rise to two interesting editorial subgenres. The deputy operational director of the Police is facing an accusation of rape (and subsequent coercion) and La Razón is calling for Grande-Marlaska's head: “The obligatory dismissal of an escapist minister”. The case has yet to be substantiated, but the newspaper has already decided that the number one in the Interior should have been aware of his subordinate's sexual affairs because they were common knowledge. Obviously, if it affected a PP official, they would invoke the presumption of innocence and all the usual artillery.

I find what they are doing on the other side more interesting. The editorial in El País is titled "Let whoever falls" and, from the title, it would seem that the Prisa newspaper is willing to let the minister fall if it is proven that he was aware of the case and preferred to look the other way. But, in reality, despite the fiery declaration of intent in the title, the text tries all the time to defuse this possibility: “The ministry has acted quickly and forcefully so far”, “The minister has raised the bar in the political response to events of this gravity”, “The PP has exaggeratedly accused the minister of hiding the facts without proof”. The cherry on top is that the editorial ends up with a “you too”, recalling the case affecting the popular mayor of Móstoles, but at the same time saying that parties should not throw these cases at each other. (Of course, the newspapers already do!) I don't know if the minister knew, didn't know, or pretended not to know. What I do know is that women have to survive in a country with a high prevalence of torticollis: every time a case like this appears, it turns out that everyone knew about it or had heard rumors... except for those directly responsible, who wander the corridors of power inevitably with their necks twisted.