"No Secret Book" says Luis Barcenas; Another Sideshow Diversion

The ongoing political scandal in Spain is unfolding as expected, with a hell of a lot of mud slinging.

In case you are new to the story please consider Ledger Book Shows Rajoy Received 35 Payments Totaling �322,231; Rajoy's Incredulous Denial; Anger Rises

Next consider the amusing threats and carefully-crafted denials of the day as noted by the Huffington Post (Spanish edition) article "No Secret Book".

The PP extesorero exgerente and Luis Barcenas has said on Monday that the secret papers released last week by the newspaper El Pa�s are "blatant manipulation".

"There has not been a secret book ", [Barcenas] told Antena 3 on the door of his home, located in one of the most luxurious areas of Madrid. Barcenas has revealed that his lawyers are preparing lawsuits against media outlets that have posted entries.

Within hours of the country publish the secret documents that linked much of the dome of the PP with the collection of bonuses in black, Barcenas issued a statement assuring that in the years when he was manager and treasurer of the PP never realized leaders payments not covered by accounting officially declared , nor was any record of inflows or outflows of funds other than those stated.

FULL STATEMENT OF Luis Barcenas

"Given the news published in different media and particularly in today's edition of the newspaper" El Pa�s "hereby means I come to reveal the following:

1. In the years when I was manager and later treasurer's Party, never carried or me or any other person record of inflows or outflows of funds other than those officially declared by the party.
2. At least during the said period, never delivered any of the persons mentioned by the newspaper "El Pa�s", or any other amounts that have not been appropriately reflected in the only existing accounts in the Party.
3. Throughout the repeated period, there was also in the party donation or contribution that did not meet any applicable regulations and / or was not properly reflected in the accounts of the Party and entered in the current account of donations.
4. In strict compliance with the Act, the accounts of the Party was always presented to the Court of Auditors for audit, that court issuing appropriate reports throughout the said period blameless in the matter.
5. Never in the many years of service I had the honor to play in the Popular Party consented, I hosted or perform any action that might involve a breach of the Act or the strict ethical principles of the Party.
6. Whenever I tried to act with the utmost transparency in managing revenues and expenses of the party, as I know Lapuerta also made Alvaro, and if I make a mistake-as-I certainly was not getting any money or taking accounting parallel other than the only one existing in the Party.
7. I reserve all legal actions, civil and criminal, amparen me to the manifest contempt for the truth and to me that is being carried out by those released to the public today falsehoods as those collected by "The Country".
8. Finally I wish to record my deep expresses regret at the unfair damage you want to do with these false information to people who, with Mariano Rajoy at the front, I've always shown a high moral, professional and personal, blameless.

Mish Comments

• I accept the fact there is "no secret book". It has been published and thus is no longer a secret.
• Reserving legal actions is pointless. Unless newspapers knowingly published a false book, charges are ridiculous.
• If Barcenas can prove he legally acquired the money for the slush fund, he should do so immediately.
• If Rajoy can prove he paid taxes on the amounts received, he should also do so immediately.

Whether you are new to the story or not, let's review comments I made earlier today in Ledger Book Shows Rajoy Received 35 Payments Totaling �322,231; Rajoy's Incredulous Denial; Anger Rises

Curious Defense

Well here we are again, with a sideshow on whether the money was declared or not. Moreover, and more importantly, with all the names and dates, it should be known 100% without a doubt whether the entries are accurate or not.

If indeed Rajoy, did declare all the income, then it should be easily seen in tax records. So what did Rajoy declare on taxes?

Do the numbers match? If not, why not? Instead we have a pair of sideshows regarding a font and whether or not the money was declared.

If the documents were fake, would the matter need to be studied or would the PP would come straight out and declare, "the documents are fake"?

Moreover, if the documents were fake (and perhaps even if they weren't, it would be in B�rcenas' best interest to challenge their authenticity.

So, where is the statement from B�rcenas that they are fake?

Instead, B�rcenas threatened to set off a political "atom bomb" if convicted. If everyone is innocent, then it is logically impossible to set off a political bomb of any size, let alone an "atom bomb".

Simply put, the denials do not add up.

For more on the scandal, the denials, the "atom bomb" threat, and Rajoy's effort to squash the news, please see Big Brother in Action: EU Wants Power to Sack Journalists; Prime Minister Rajoy Threatens Newspapers Following Corruption Articles.

Another Sideshow Diversion

We now see yet another diversion attempt. This time the diversion is "There has not been a secret book".

This distraction attempt follows Rajoy's diversionary tactic regarding "undeclared money",  preposterous lawsuit threats by Rajoy and B�rcenas, and the PP wanting an investigation to see if the documents are real (even though neither the PP nor Rajoy denied their authenticity).

Once again I point out the laughable notion is that the published B�rcenas documents are fake. Seriously, wouldn't B�rcenas know? And if they were fake, surely B�rcenas would make that claim.

Yet, here we are with the PP demanding an investigation as to whether or not the documents are fake, with denials of "secret" books, and with smoke-blowing lawsuit threats.

The smoke, intimidation tactics, and outright lies have likely just begun. If this all sounds too familiar it's because it is familiar.

Richard Nixon: "I am not a crook".
Bill Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman".

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com