“We say the best you can do Adorni is to resign and take the burden off the president,” he shot Luis Majul in his cycle of El Observador 107.9. In his radio editorial, the journalist referred to the scandal of the libertarian Chief of Staff and clarified: “We are not putting pressure on him or on the family. On the contrary, it is a recommendation from good people, that he remove himself from the eye of the storm.” “If someone interprets the family as pressure, to Lilia Lemoine or Magoya, let him stay until Kirchnerism wins,” the driver concluded.
After the interview that Adorni gave last week to José Del Rio, on the program Small Table of LN+, criticism from both opponents and members multiplied. The first public and extensive attempt by the Casa Rosada official to respond to accusations of alleged financial inconsistencies, which have pursued him since March, had terrible repercussions on the Mileista government. Even the analysts closest to the ruling party had to recognize the inconsistencies of the coordinator of ministers in his statements.
In the report, issued on June 11, Adorni confirmed that he filed corrective affidavits and acknowledged that he had failed to report assets of approximately $500,000, an admission that marked a turn from his previous responses to Congress. During the conversation with Del Rio, the official maintained that the questioned assets were generated before entering the national government.
On LN+, the Chief of Staff acknowledged that both he and his wife, Bettina Angelettikept undeclared savings for years. “We save in black like all Argentines,” he responded when asked why those funds had not been reported in a timely manner. He also assured that “the way to escape the old policy was to have savings in the black” and that he never imagined saving in the black during those years.
The Chief of Staff stated that part of these resources come from savings accumulated during years of private activity and another portion from investments in cryptocurrencies. According to him, he had invested around $200,000 and subsequently obtained profits close to $300,000. He also maintained that he will regularize the tax situation and pay the corresponding taxes.
The controversy revolves around a series of assets and expenses that different journalistic reports and judicial complaints consider incompatible with the income declared by the official. Among the assets and operations under analysis are a home in the private Indio Cua neighborhood, an apartment in Caballito, luxury renovations allegedly paid for in cash, national and international trips and consumption that would have far exceeded the officially registered income.
The timeline of the case began to unfold earlier this year. On March 25, after journalistic investigations about properties, trips and asset movements came to light, Adorni held a press conference at Casa Rosada to reject the accusations. There he assured that all his assets had been built in the private sphere and denounced a “political and media operation” against him. However, he avoided providing details about several of the questioned assets due to the existence of ongoing legal proceedings.
At the beginning of May, new elements appeared that intensified suspicions. A statement related to works carried out on one of its properties indicated that the contractor would have received $245,000 in cash and without formal billing. At the same time, details were learned about properties acquired by the official and expenses that, according to the complainants, were not related to the declared income.
During May and early June the judicial investigation, led by the judge Ariel Lijo and prosecutor Gerardo Pollicita, It continued to advance while the opposition demanded further explanations. According to various publications, Justice began to analyze asset documentation, financial movements, sworn statements and real estate transactions linked to both Adorni and his family environment.
The turning point came with the Mesa Chica television interview, when the official publicly admitted the existence of approximately half a million dollars that did not appear in his previous statements and confirmed the presentation of corrective statements. This confession provoked new criticism from opposition sectors, who considered the situation incompatible with the transparency standards required of a front-line official. Adorni’s acceptance of the “Tax Innocence” regime, which was promoted by the same government of Javier Milei, may have tax effects although it does not block a possible criminal investigation into the origin of the assets.
In this way, the case went in just three months from a series of journalistic complaints about properties, trips and expenses allegedly incompatible with the declared income to a political, parliamentary and judicial controversy of national scope, aggravated by the public admission of Adorni himself that he maintained undeclared assets and that they were only incorporated into his asset presentations after the investigations began.
Image gallery
