Goodbye Cristina - Game Over.

[EJLarson]

The whole point of wanting the handover to take place in the Congress is to cement that place as her/the new seat of power. As well, she has so far succeeded in ensuring that she remains at the helm of peronismo. Absent a well-coordinated coup, she is likely to stay there for a while.

Her trump cards are almost total control of the Senate - absent a huge desertion - and the possibility that La Campora etc, possibly allied with (some) labor, will create mayhem on the streets (saqueos etc). Her chances of success are dependent on a) how well Macri succeeds at governing, and providing security, b ) how well she can hold on to power within peronismo, as mentioned by Queso.

The part that I don't understand is this: when she's ex-President, why is she automatically head of the whole PJ? Of course, as ex-President, she has status and cachet, but real political power? From what resources does that derive? Without access to the Treasury and the presidential power, why would she have influence in the Senate, and why is she more than just another loud voice in the PJ?

 

[Rich One]

duplicate

 

[ben]

Regarding this last medio cautelar, I'm not sure what the point is, besides offering a big F### You to CFK. And I don't understand why was it necessary.

To not accept the atributos de mando in the Congress? Sure. Absolutely. But to block CFK - who regardless of legal machinations, clearly is the president until the new one takes his oath - from attending the oath? Why?

Absent some explanation regarding why this was necessary, I'm a bit disappointed. This last step was needlessly divisive, seems a bit vindictive even, and plays into the narrative that Macri started this fight.

To be sure, the reaction of calling this a coup d'etat is shrill and silly. But again: what was the point of this step?

 

[glasgowjohn]

Regarding this last medio cautelar, I'm not sure what the point is, besides offering a big F### You to CFK. And I don't understand why was it necessary.

To not accept the atributos de mando in the Congress? Sure. Absolutely. But to block CFK - who regardless of legal machinations, clearly is the president until the new one takes his oath - from attending the oath? Why?

Absent some explanation regarding why this was necessary, I'm a bit disappointed. This last step was needlessly divisive, seems a bit vindictive even, and plays into the narrative that Macri started this fight.

To be sure, the reaction of calling this a coup d'etat is shrill and silly. But again: what was the point of this step?

the reason for the cautelar was some very strong rumors that she was going to do something silly while she was still the president. She stil may do so but not on Thursday.

 

[ben]

the reason for the cautelar was some very strong rumors that she was going to do something silly while she was still the president. She stil may do so but not on Thursday.

If true, it would be wise to leak those rumors, with some specifics, and as soon as possible. Otherwise it appears a supremely petty move.

 

[ben]

OK, it appears that some elements have been leaked.

If at all true, CFK is simply an outright and outrageous liar. And it would go far to explain why Macri did what he did.

Given what I've personally seen of them, the InfoBae version is FAR more believable than CFK's account. He is, as Gabriella Michetti notes, always respectful. Watch his exchange with an openly hostile pundit; now hark back to and and all of CFK's famous YouTube moments. Now tell me which version of the exchange rings more true.

Apart from this, his account is cogent, the quotes sound absolutely like her. Hers is absolutely incoherent. His account of the story on Mirtha's show, including the body language down knowing smiles between the future first couple when asked about her reaction, sound exactly right if the Infobae quotes are true.

So if the Infobae story has any truth to it - and it smells right - it would go far to explain why Macri did what he did. A completely unscrupulous president - literally, one with no scruples - cannot be trusted nor assumed not to drop a couple more stinkbombs. And Macri has every right to want no shoes to drop on 10 December.

And it's not like everything done till now - including, apparently, shamelessly putting completely false words in Macri's mouth - is all. The show continues. Now they're appropriating the official Casa Rosada account handle on Twitter. FFS.

You want to keep the account history. That's OK. Change the account name to CasaRosadaK. Or something. It's not hard to do. There are instructions in Spanish too.

But no. Gotta take the furniture out with you.

The C and F joke sounds less and less funny each day.

EDIT: The future first lady formally denies CFK's account.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Di Lello is a Federal Attorney, judge Servini de Cubria has not ruled on this as of yet.

Clarin and La Nacion asserted that Di Lello sentenced. I think that they tried to confuse people. A prosecutor in a case like this can only enact an opinion. While Di Lello seems to have fear of having a domestic accident falling into a bullet like Nisman because both accused Macri on the illegal phone tapping case, nobody can put presure on Servini de Cubria.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

The part that I don't understand is this: when she's ex-President, why is she automatically head of the whole PJ? Of course, as ex-President, she has status and cachet, but real political power? From what resources does that derive? Without access to the Treasury and the presidential power, why would she have influence in the Senate, and why is she more than just another loud voice in the PJ?

Because she is a leader that they recognize as such.

 

[AmigoArtistico]

Regarding this last medio cautelar, I'm not sure what the point is, besides offering a big F### You to CFK. And I don't understand why was it necessary.

To not accept the atributos de mando in the Congress? Sure. Absolutely. But to block CFK - who regardless of legal machinations, clearly is the president until the new one takes his oath - from attending the oath? Why?

Absent some explanation regarding why this was necessary, I'm a bit disappointed. This last step was needlessly divisive, seems a bit vindictive even, and plays into the narrative that Macri started this fight.

To be sure, the reaction of calling this a coup d'etat is shrill and silly. But again: what was the point of this step?

http://www.clarin.com/politica/resguardo-Justicia-evitar-sorpresas-momento_0_1481852203.html

 

[AmigoArtistico]

Clarin and La Nacion asserted that Di Lello sentenced. I think that they tried to confuse people. A prosecutor in a case like this can only enact an opinion. While Di Lello seems to have fear of having a domestic accident falling into a bullet like Nisman because both accused Macri on the illegal phone tapping case, nobody can put presure on Servini de Cubria.

Both La Nacion y Clarin made it very clear that Servini had to make the decision. Please stop disseminating false information.