Today the analysis could last as long as a news broadcast. Let's begin: today marks one year since the great blackout. April 28th. It was a day like today, more or less. We were heading into summer. Sunshine and mild temperatures. Lucky for us. And it started when the kids were at school and people were at work. And it ended at night. The responsibility for the blackout has been diluted in a chain of problems that occurred in a cascade, and nothing has happened here.Jordi Pujol has already slept at his home tonight, in Barcelona, where he arrived yesterday evening quite tired, with the frustration of not having been able to declare and of knowing that he has not been able to receive an acquittal of which he was convinced.Don't miss this chronicle by our delegate in Madrid, Núria Orriols, full of details about the two hours the former president spent at the National Court. They asked him which years he was president and he got it right, from 1980 to 2003. But when they asked him if he knew what he was being accused of, he started to ramble.But, above all, don't miss the in-depth reflection by Jordi Nieva-Fenoll, professor of procedural law at the University of Barcelona:

Today the analysis could last as long as a TV news broadcast. Let's start: today marks one year since the big blackout. April 28th. It was a day like today, more or less. We were heading into summer. Sunshine and mild temperatures. Lucky for us. And it started when the kids were at school and people were at work. And it ended at night. The responsibility for the blackout has been diluted in a chain of problems that presented themselves in a cascade, and nothing has happened here.Jordi Pujol has already slept at his home tonight, in Barcelona, where he arrived yesterday evening quite tired, with the frustration of not having been able to declare and knowing that he has not been able to receive an acquittal of which he was convinced.Don't miss this chronicle by our delegate in Madrid, Núria Orriols, full of details about the two hours the former president spent at the National Court. They asked him what years he was president and he got it right, from 1980 to 2003. But when they asked him if he knew what he was accused of, he started to ramble.But, above all, don't miss the in-depth reflection by Jordi Nieva-Fenoll, professor of procedural law at the University of Barcelona:

In the end, Jordi Pujol's citation before the National High Court has been a kind of black whim (a capricho by Goya, who already denounced the abuses of power of the Spain of his time) by the court presided over by magistrate José Ricardo de Prada, who has not bothered to hide much his complacency in making the former Catalan president go through this grotesque episode. “The court does not want to fall into ageism,” he let slip, in an evident tone of mockery. In Madrid they have corroborated what had already been determined in Barcelona: that Pujol was not in physical or psychological condition to appear before a court. “Personal contact was essential,” insisted judge De Prada, light years away from acknowledging that he and the court had committed what in legal language is known as a monumental fuck-up. The most elementary common sense warned that the maneuver, besides being ugly, had no sense or content, beyond a gratuitous exhibition of power in greater abundance by ultranationalist Spain. But the most elementary common sense is something that cannot and should not be asked of the Spanish judiciary's leadership, because they are exempt from it.The episode recalls several things about justice in Spain. One, that slow justice is not justice and that when it takes ten, twelve, or fourteen years to judge things, it can happen, for example, that one of the accused (against whom, on the other hand, nothing has been proven) is already dead or in very poor health, as in this case. On the other hand, for the protagonists of the Kitchen case, which is being tried in the same National Court, the delay has been good for them to fuel the attacks of feigned amnesia with which they appear to testify. The mention of Kitchen leads us to the following questions: the different yardsticks of Spanish justice are also political. And this explains why De Prada and his court have fun mocking Pujol, while in the Kitchen courtroom, Judge Teresa Palacios takes care of interrupting or discrediting questions that might inconvenience Rajoy, De Cospedal, or Sáez de Santamaría, who not only do not receive any kind of vexatious treatment but arrive and leave with their heads held high. Placing justice at the service or against one political interest or another is one of the worst forms of perversion of the rule of law.This episode has also been a reminder that what we call the Catalonia-Spain conflict is the result of the sum of two weaknesses: that of Spain, which has never managed to complete, not even with the Civil War, its Jacobin and homogenizing national project (one state, one nation, one flag, one king, one language), and the weakness of Catalonia, which not only has not managed to get out of this national project of Spain, but also, to a large extent, does not want to get out of it. Spanish nationalism is boastful; Catalanism is victimist; both are resentful and rancorous. Nothing ever advances, or advances very little. Jordi Pujol is a complete personification of all this.

We now know that Mariano Rajoy's great secret, the masterful formula that explains such a long political career, has consisted of never getting bogged down in details. If we are to believe his account to the judge, a Minister of the Interior, a head of government, or a party leader knows almost nothing about what goes on below him. "I was not aware of the reserved funds for a second of my life when I was Minister of the Interior," he stated. And this is despite the fact that one of his predecessors, José Luis Corcuera, was tried (and acquitted) for fraudulent use of these funds. But the point is that with this formula he has been able to surf through all the scandals that have affected the PP while he was one of the main, or the main, leader. He never knew anything because he wants us to believe that he only dealt with the great matters of state, with high politics.

Nine years after testifying in the Gürtel case, Mariano Rajoy has returned to the National Court to testify in the Kitchen case. He arrived in San Fernando de Henares at 9:40 a.m. by car and accessed the judicial premises through the parking lot. He responded for thirty minutes, in a statement that began with monosyllables and evasiveness and ended with three pleas in which he distanced himself from the facts and lent a hand to the defenses of the accused. The star phrase came right at the beginning, during the interrogation by the PSOE lawyer, who asked him if he was M. Rajoy, el Asturiano, or el Barbas: "My name is Mariano Rajoy, as everyone knows, and then each person calls me what they want; ask them." After this first display, he dedicated himself to categorically denying everything. "Did you give Bárcenas an envelope with the remainder of the B fund? Did you put the last page of Bárcenas's papers into the shredder? Do you have knowledge that Bárcenas was pressured or intimidated by order of party officials?", asked the PSOE lawyer. These are three questions that the former PP treasurer assured on Monday when he testified as a witness. "Absolutely false", Rajoy limited himself to answering on all three occasions.

I begin where we left off yesterday: the creation of the Investment Consortium that the Government and Esquerra have agreed upon to direct and control state investments in Catalonia. It was presented yesterday as a tool to guarantee budgetary execution in Catalonia. Well, yesterday a prominent Esquerra leader pointed out to me, through a message, in good humor, let it be clear, that I had been very harsh saying that while the Chinese were making humanoids run, we were creating consortia. I hope I am mistaken, but in Catalonia, political consensus on anything significant has disappeared a long time ago. And the State, the governments of the PP and the PSOE, have shown that there are a thousand ways to budget and not execute, making it look like an accident, and even your fault. Nevertheless, as I tell you, if the invention works, we will be here to acknowledge it.And speaking of inventions, Bárcenas and the Kitchen. What the PP treasurer declared yesterday before the judge and for five hours is that the PP itself set up the Kitchen as a way to save Rajoy. That when they saw that the accounting records of M.Rajoy and MR could incriminate the party president, they set up the patriotic police to steal and destroy documentation from Bárcenas. Bárcenas is today a free man, he was in prison for eight years, convicted of corruption. What he came to say yesterday is that Rajoy was aware that the party had double accounting, that Rajoy was paid under the table (because it was he, Bárcenas, who paid him in envelopes), that Rajoy made him destroy the evidence but that he recorded it. What happened is that later most of it was destroyed by the patriotic police. The undeclared money came from commissions paid by companies to which the PP government awarded public works, and it is the money with which part of the renovation of the party headquarters in Madrid was paid for. Yesterday, therefore, Bárcenas sang La Traviata and Rajoy and Cospedal will declare the day after tomorrow.So the Kitchen operation would have been mounted from within the state itself by the PP government to prevent it from splashing Rajoy. These were the "patriots" who were to save Spain from the clutches of Catalan independence. The same "patriots" who will now investigate the United States to find out if Spain deceived them to close Banca Privada d'Andorra. "Mariano, be strong".Good morning.

On Monday at noon, Spanish news outlets prioritized the statement of Luis Bárcenas in the trial for the Kitchen case.In La 1's Telediario, the news reported that the former treasurer of the PP had ordered the destruction of the recordings about the party's slush fund and that when he wrote "M.R." on his papers, he was referring to Mariano Rajoy. The trial chronicle concluded that from Bárcenas's statements it could be inferred that the PP leadership was aware of the slush fund accounting and that, therefore, "the spotlight is starting to turn towards Mariano Rajoy". Subsequently, the public television's news program incorporated the PSOE's reaction to the trial developments and those of the current PP.In Informativos Telecinco the approach was quite similar. They spoke of the deleted documentation as "compromised recordings" and highlighted that according to Bárcenas, Rajoy himself knew of the existence of the slush fund. They also included a response from the former treasurer in which he specified that the initials "M.R." in the treasurer's papers referred to Mariano Rajoy.On the other hand, on Antena 3 noticias Sandra Golpe's report incorporated a tone laden with skepticism and a touch of sarcasm that gave the news a blatant bias. To refer to the stolen or missing documentation, Golpe said “sensitive information”, but each time she pronounced “sensitive” she lowered her tone of voice and with surprise, attributing an imaginary or unreal dimension to the concept, as if what she was talking about was unheard of. Furthermore, when the presenter repeated what Bárcenas had said, she emphasized with a forced emphasis that it was he who said it, attributing a component of suspicion to his statements: “Luis Bárcenas says –he says today– that he recorded Rajoy talking about the PP's slush fund”. This affected "says today” added a circumstantial element to the statement, the fragility of a last-minute occurrence. “The recordings included –he says– audios of Mariano Rajoy”. The "he says" was again pronounced with a certain disdain, reducing it to the category of an unconvincing version. To top it all off, Antena 3's report did not at any point echo one of the aspects that the rest of the news programs highlighted even in their headlines. It was the statement where Bárcenas specified that the initials "M.R." that he had written in the papers of the parallel accounting corresponded to the initials of Mariano Rajoy.Sandra Golpe's theatrical ability to craft a double reading, a subtext, in the news from her tone of voice and facial expressions would be worthy of a Goya. While on paper the information may have a relative appearance of journalistic neutrality, the singsong, the intensity, the micro-expressions, and the slight shoulder movements would be worthy of a doctoral thesis on subliminal communication.

Operation Kitchen was a conspiracy mounted from within the State itself with the PP government to prevent the Bárcenas case and the scandal over the illegal financing of the Popular Party from splashing its main leaders, especially Mariano Rajoy. And it must be said that after hearing Bárcenas himself in court this Monday, it seems that the operation achieved its main objective, which was to save Rajoy. The former PP treasurer explained that he recorded a conversation with him in which he handed over a certain amount of money and a paper with the "B" accounts. But this audio has never seen the light of day. Why? Well, because the agents of the so-called "patriotic police" were responsible for erasing any trace of it.

An audio in which Mariano Rajoy is heard in the office on the seventh floor of the headquarters on Génova street receiving an envelope of cash and destroying the documentation that proved the existence of the PP's slush fund. This has been one of the protagonists of the expected declaration of Luis Bárcenas as a victim in the "This operation begins at the Popular Party headquarters with the deletion of data from computer hard drives. That is to say, it is initiated by the party leaders and then transferred to the part related to the Ministry of the Interior," Luis Bárcenas underlined during his declaration, which lasted four and a half hours. However, despite the PSOE's attempt to have the PP respond as a beneficiary through a lucrative title

In the Kitchen case trial, in which the leadership of Mariano Rajoy's Ministry of the Interior sits on the defendant's bench, political leaders of the Popular Party are beginning to be interrogated. After the statements of six investigators, it was the turn of Ignacio Cosidó, who was director general of the Spanish police from 2012 to 2016. In a statement that lasted more than an hour, he disassociated himself from the espionage of Luis Bárcenas and framed the investigation into the former PP treasurer within the Gürtel case, concerning the illegal financing of the PP. "I always understood that the UDEF was carrying it out," he stated when questioned by the prosecutor. The UDEF is the Central Unit for Economic and Fiscal Crime. "I knew the UDEF was involved, but I didn't know other units were involved," he added later. The trial suspects the involvement of the deputy operational directorate (DAO) and the Central Unit for Operational Support (UCAO). Five hours later, on the other side of the Plaza de la Vila de París, the trial against José Luis Ábalosresumed. The star witness was Isabel Pardo de Vera, former president of Adif, who denied that there were irregularities in the purchase of masks – a "wise decision" – and in the hiring of Jessica Rodríguez. Let's take it step by step.

Political life in Madrid is currently unfolding between two scenarios. Firstly, the courts, due to the start of the trials for corruption cases involving the PP and the PSOE. And secondly, in the realm of international relations, concerning everything related to the situation in the Middle East, after a precarious two-week truce was announced, with very uncertain results. These are very diverse issues, which obviously have nothing to do with each other, but which, if followed closely, give a fairly accurate idea of the point at which political forces stand, particularly those of the Popular Party and the Socialists. The start of the trial of the Ábalos-Koldo-Aldama case scheme was, and will continue to be in the coming weeks, a great opportunity for the PP to take advantage of the exhibition of the reprehensible procedures employed by the former Minister of Public Works and former organization secretary of the PSOE, his advisor, and the businessman who did business with them, in relation to public contracts to acquire sanitary material, allegedly violating the law in a tragic context, that of the COVID-19 pandemic.

There is a name linked to the PSOE that has appeared in the first two sessions of the Kitchen case trial, which implicates the leadership of the PP's Ministry of the Interior: Javier Pérez Dolset. He is a businessman and collaborator of Leire Díez, the former socialist militant nicknamed the plumber of the PSOE, and considers himself a victim of the state's dirty dealings. Months ago, he admitted to meeting with Santos Cerdán at Ferraz to hand over documents on irregular practices of Mariano Rajoy's government, and since last October he has been investigated for attempting to bribe two prosecutors. What is his connection to Kitchen? Four years ago, he provided the Spanish police's Internal Affairs Unit with a series of recordings by José Manuel Villarejo. And now, at the request of the retired commissioner, he will have to testify as a witness in the trial.

Monday morning, as the trial for the Kitchen case was starting, journalists gathered in front of the National Court were harassing some of the defendants. The only one who played along was Commissioner José Manuel Villarejo, who, with his characteristic cap and sunglasses, was eager to stir up the media pot. The character is responsible for tensing the atmosphere because he always performs better in tense situations. Amidst the swarm of microphones, a journalist from Mañaneros 360 asked him a question and specified it was for Javier Ruiz's program on Televisión Española. The presenter's name provoked an immediate reaction from the commissioner: “Ah! Don Javierito!”, he exclaimed sarcastically. “Tell Don Javierito that the PP did not hire me, as he says. That is a lie. Besides, Javierito, we were such good friends in the past... It's unbelievable!” Javier Ruiz, alarmed, interrupted the broadcast and, although Villarejo could not hear him, wanted to clarify the blunder: “No! No! No! No, commissioner! We are not going to have a live dialogue, but good friends you and I... We don't even know each other! Never in my life! You are friends with other presenters! You are mistaken! You tried to contact me, you did it by mobile phone when we reported on you. And we haven't had a single coffee. We've never met in our lives!”Villarejo, as if he had been warned of the response, insisted: “If you say we don't know each other... What a bad memory you have, Javierito, huh! You were worried because I was competing with Ferreras at the same time!” He implied that, in the past, Ruiz would have been upset by the commissioner's closeness to Antonio García Ferreras of La Sexta, and he, who then had the program on Cuatro, also wanted his exclusives. Javier Ruiz, uneasy, denied it again. “Absolutely false! You are lying, Villarejo! We have never had this conversation! You are a liar!” He insisted that everyone knew which journalist he worked for: “We are aware of who he passed information to and who bought it without checking it, no matter how crude it was”. One person's word against the other's and the mystery for the audience. Villarejo is capable of dynamiting any context. It was impossible to clarify who was telling the truth, but it is worth analyzing the commissioner's strategy. He deviated from journalism to personal confrontation. Since he did not have control of the informational situation, he took over the television frame. He provoked the journalist by publicly discrediting him. Villarejo is aware that implying complicity makes the journalist lose credibility. The commissioner himself brought up Ferreras's name in the discussion because that way he could put the entire media structure under suspicion. He exposed the sewers of journalism to survive himself.

A few days ago, King Juan Carlos, the emeritus, was applauded and cheered by the audience in a bullring, who, with signs of enthusiasm, asked him to return. To return to Spain, of course, but also to return to the position of power and preeminence that, according to these people, he deserves. Juan Carlos I, it is worth remembering, is an unelected head of state who, over forty years of reign, defrauded billions to the Treasury of the very state over which he reigned, and who also used the institutions and powers of the state (and, naturally, the public treasury) for his personal interests, ranging from erotic adventures to business dealings with oil sheikhs who have finally taken him in under the auspices of a dictatorship. Many, however, are still supporters of Juan Carlos convinced that the monarch lives in forced exile, a victim of his son Felipe's treacherous understanding with the enemies of the homeland, etc.I mention this because, in Spain, corruption is so deeply rooted within the very architecture of the state that it is an inseparable part of it. From the king downwards, literally: the judiciary, the army, the police forces. Of course, also elected governments, whether central, regional, or municipal. And political parties, naturally. One should never forget the lush jungle of corrupters, which includes everything from construction, energy, and technology companies to media outlets, and, needless to say, banks.Now, the PP and the PSOE are facing, in parallel, trials for corruption cases: the corrosive Kitchen plot, concerning the Popular Party, and the shabby masquerade case, or Koldo case, or Ábalos or Cerdán (it is referred to in all these ways) concerning the Socialists. The coincidence of these two judicial proceedings can be considered the start of the election campaign for the upcoming general elections. Therefore, we will see and hear the leaders, and sympathetic journalists and media, exchanging insults and reproaches in the childish and poisoned tone that Spanish politics has adopted for some time, in a spectacle that can only be endured on the most cheerful days.However, we should not be mistaken. Even in corruption there are classes, and in the Spanish state, the one in charge of this matter is and always will be the Popular Party. The corrupt dealings of the socialists and other parties can amount to considerable mire, but no other party, not even the PSOE, can afford to organize patriotic police forces or to blow up banks in Andorra just to destroy political enemies, both external and internal. This is for one reason: as in the film Tomorrow is Another Day, the other parties are contingent, while the PP is necessary. Necessary for the continuity of the homeland, as understood by the aforementioned institutions and companies. Necessary to maintain a balance of power in Spain, as understood by, for example, all those who applauded Juan Carlos in the bullring.

The start of the trial in the Kitchen case has led right-leaning programs to seek narrative and visual strategies to minimize the impact on the PP. The most ingenious maneuver was that of Antena 3 Noticias. When opening the news program, they opted for a dispersal narrative: announcing the spring judicial calendar. First, they referred to the Kitchen case, but then they recalled all the cases affecting the socialist party: the mask case, which will begin to be judged this Tuesday; that of Pedro Sánchez's brother, which will start on May 28, and they also added the cases of PSOE financing, of Leire Díez, and of Santos Cerdán, which do not yet have a trial date. They thus made evident the imbalance of the scales between the PP and the PSOE. They projected the calendar on the news screen, and among the faces of the accused, the PSOE logo stood out in red. The PP's was nowhere to be seen. Sandra Golpe announced: "Intense judicial calendar that will reactivate the clash between PP and PSOE". Later, she insisted: "This judicial spring is coming very intensely!".When focusing on the Kitchen case, a visual strategy that had already been repeated throughout the morning became evident. To explain the case, they used archive images that focused, above all, on Luis Bárcenas and, a little less, on José Manuel Villarejo. At Espejo Público and El programa de Ana Rosa —with Quintana on vacation—, they did the same. Bárcenas' images were repeatedly shown in a loop in different contexts: leaving prison, testifying in a trial, sitting on the defendant's bench, entering the courts, or walking down the street with his son or his lawyer. Therefore, Bárcenas did not seem like the popular prosecution but the main defendant. Secondly, Villarejo's figure was the most used. In a more fleeting and sporadic way, Jorge Fernández Díaz, Francisco Martínez, and Eugenio Pino were shown, but in most cases, they were more general shots that did not personalize the involvement as much. On Espejo público, the face that occupied the large screen behind Susanna Griso's desk was Bárcenas'. On Informativos Telecinco, the graphic layouts on the screen continued to point to Bárcenas as guilty. "The PP's kitchen against Bárcenas", they titled in huge letters. And below, they put an image of the treasurer and another of Mariano Rajoy. But with a singularity: on Bárcenas' photograph, they put a label in capital letters: CONVICTED. The explanation of the facts was correct and rigorous, but the entire visual construction continued to point to the treasurer. A structural scandal affecting a party's apparatus and the sewers of the State now has a visual narrative that diverts attention and visually centers everything on two figures: Bárcenas and Villarejo. The choice is not innocent. This personification does not correspond to the magnitude of the facts being judged and serves to reduce the reputational impact of Rajoy's government's top brass.

The National High Court kicks off the trial of the Kitchen case. It is the operation orchestrated by the state's "sewers" to steal from Luis Bárcenas, the former treasurer of the PP, information or data that could compromise leaders of the Popular Party within the framework of the Gürtel case. Sitting on the defendant's bench are, among others, Jorge Fernández Díaz (who was Minister of the Interior from 2011 to 2016), Francisco Martínez (who was Secretary of State for the Interior), Eugenio Pino (who was deputy operational director of the Spanish police) and retired commissioner José Manuel Villarejo. "I face the trial with great enthusiasm, I trust that the truth will prevail," Villarejo acknowledged upon arriving at the headquarters of the National High Court in San Fernando de Henares. And he said he has "no fear" of going to prison: "If they put me in again, it will be to not get out. Since they've seen that I don't shut up, it's normal that this time the plan works out for them," he added.

Year 2013. Mariano Rajoy governs Spain with an absolute majority and the "papers of Luis Bácenas" come to light, revealing the existence of a black box within the PP. Following this, the Ministry of the Interior, led by Jorge Fernández Díaz, designs and –according to the Public Prosecutor's account– launches an "illicit police intelligence operation" with the aim of stealing information and evidence from Luis Bárcenas, the former treasurer of the PP, that would incriminate popular leaders in the context of the Gürtel case. The ultimate objective is to "prevent" it from reaching the hands of the investigators. Five years later, that corruption trial ends with the sentence that leads to the motion of no confidence that brings Pedro Sánchez to La Moncloa. And now, thirteen years later, the leadership of the patriotic police sits on the defendants' bench, with "requests for fifteen years in prison by the Public Prosecutor's Office, in a trial that begins on Monday at the National Court and which will have to shed light on the maneuvers of the state's sewers to protect the PP. The main crimes they are accused of are cover-up, embezzlement, bribery, disclosure of secrets, and influence peddling.

1. While here we are eating the 'mona' cake, in Madrid they are working. The third term of the school year begins with one of those news items that will have repercussions. This Monday, the trial for Operation Kitchen begins at the National Court. The case will once again place the Popular Party at the epicenter of the mire. And this is not just a case of corruption. It is much more than that. It is being investigated whether the party in power used the State to cover up its own corruption. The indications seem clear, but justice, in Spain, can always come out with a broken candle.

In your circle, there are honest architects who forgo speculative projects that would have provided them with generous incomes; doctors who wouldn't change the Raval Primary School for a less intense one; cooks who feed us honestly and waiters who know the names and quirks of all of us; honest public administrators who transform the city's common spaces; editors who seek out books like treasures; journalists capable of paying homage at the moment of death to the pianists who gave us life; children who help out in their parents' fruit shop and learn the ropes; people who raise the blinds very early and others who run to catch the last metro. There are also classes of young people who graduate with a brand-new future and applaud as if the room were collapsing when their brother picks up a severely disabled graduate in his arms and sits him in his wheelchair, about to collect his diploma. There are families who fight for it and teachers who make it possible. There are also conscious business people and scientists who do research, women who clean and take care of our grandparents as if they were their own, and they are all calculating how much they should pay to the Treasury.

Despite the PP's efforts to deny its existence, the maneuvers of the state's sewers during Mariano Rajoy's governments are accumulating ever more evidence. New audio published this Wednesday by RAC1In fact, it directly implicates the former Spanish president in the Kitchen operation, the operation paid for with secret funds to steal information about the party's corruption from former PP treasurer Luis Bárcenas. It concerns a September 2014 conversation between María Dolores de Cospedal and José Manuel Villarejo. "I know that they had previously found, and more or less cleaned out, everything he had," the former PP secretary general says at one point, supposedly about Bárcenas. She adds: "The president told me, no one else did."