The leader of Vox, Santiago Abascal, refuted this Thursday the argument of his PP colleague Alberto Núñez Feijóo that he could have reached La Moncloa if he had accepted Junts' conditions for his investiture, as Pedro Sanchez did. “I supported the inauguration of Mr. Feijóo,” Abascal said during an interview on Telecinco. “I heard Mr. Feijóo tell Mr. Sánchez: 'I could have become president if I had made an agreement with Junts' and I did not come out to tell him: 'You would not be president because Vox you think of it would prevent him from becoming president if…' They had made an agreement with Junts because I understand that “it was a rhetorical expression.”
Before realizing that Feijóo's investiture was impossible because the voices of Vox and Junts were incompatible, Abascal made no secret of his displeasure with the PP leader for condemning his statements in Argentina, where he said that the Spanish people in the end Pedro would want to see Sánchez hanging on his feet. “I stand by the words that I said point by point,” he assured the Vox boss. However, as in recent days, Abascal denied that this phrase was a threat and assured that it was “a colloquial expression”.
Abascal has assured that, unlike Feijóo, he does not ask the Left for forgiveness, but has made it clear that he does not want the president of the government to be lynched, as his sentence suggested, but that he “gets a fair trial and…” for that what he has committed will be condemned.
Aside from the PP rebuking Abascal's words, the government viewed his demonstrations as “extremely serious.” In fact, this Wednesday the PSOE filed a complaint with the Attorney General's Office against the deputy and president of Vox for, in their opinion, committing a hate crime, according to prosecutors' sources. Since Abascal is a qualified person due to his status as a congressman, the authority to analyze the contents of the complaint and initiate an investigation rests with the Prosecutor's Office of the Supreme Court. If, after analyzing the content of the complaint, the public prosecutor's office comes to the conclusion that there is evidence of a crime, it carries out the procedures for examining the facts and determining criminal liability. Once the investigative procedures are completed, the Public Prosecutor's Office decides whether to file a complaint or complaint with the Supreme Court or, on the contrary, to initiate the initiated procedure if it considers that there is no evidence of a crime.
What influences the most is what happens next. So you don't miss anything, subscribe.
Subscribe to
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits
_