Days ago, journalist Rodis Recalt revealed in the pages of NOTICIAS that there was an incipient agreement between Javier Milei and Cristina Kirchner for the future composition of the Supreme Court. The information this week reached other media, and was also urgently denied by communicators from the ruling party who have direct dialogue with Sister Karina Milei, the great guardian of what can or cannot be published.
What did the article in this magazine say? That the negotiators of the agreement now no longer secret – thanks to journalism – are the Kirchnerist Juan Martín Mena, former number 2 of the AFI during the Cristinism and last Vice Minister of Justice of Alberto Fernández, and the Secretary of Justice of the Government, Sebastián Amerio, who answers to the star advisor Santiago Caputo and is the one who actually manages the ministry headed on paper by Mariano Cúneo Libarona. Mena and Amerio, according to the sources consulted, met to discuss the expansion of the Court. Today it has three members, but they want to fill the two vacancies left by Elena Highton de Nolasco and Juan Carlos Maqueda, and have five members of the highest court. The formula is as old as it is vulgar: one for you, one for me. Let’s go and let’s go. Kirchnerism wants to appoint Mendoza senator Anabel Fernández Sagasti, a Christian to the core. And the Government proposes the president of the Federal Chamber of Comodoro Py, Mariano Llorens. A “win-win”.
Why are libertarians willing to negotiate? Because they need two-thirds of the Senate to approve the specifications of the new judges, something that did not happen with the last attempt by Ariel Lijo and Manuel García-Mansilla. That time, the former president lowered her thumb in the vote and the Government candidates fell by the wayside. It is true, García-Mansilla had entered the Court through the window for a few hours, but then he resigned before the black ball of Congress.
It has already been said that, when the issue came to light, the Government tried to deny it through some like-minded communicators, but the negotiation remains on track. The big issue will be how to present and justify it to public opinion when libertarians live campaigning against “the kukas” and “k corruption.” “Kirchnerism never again,” said a flag with which they posed in the campaign.
How to explain that it is okay to defeat the K in the elections and “drive the last nail into the drawer of Kirchnerism,” and that it is also acceptable and normal to negotiate with them to each put a new judge on the Court, one for you and one for me?
Doublespeak is one of the main characteristics of the politicians whom Milei defines as “the caste.”
