The reaction it has provoked in the official orbit, however, is also far from being exemplary. On the one hand, because in an act of supreme hypocrisy (of those who like to accuse their opponents so much, you know, seeing Murillo Karam in someone else’s eye and not Gertz Manero in their own) they ask the book to support with data your story, eat the faut, although it has never occurred to them to ask the same of their leader. Who would have said that the applauds of the hoax of the fraud in 2006, of the consultation to “judge” former presidents or of the cancellation of the NAIM, of the childcare centers and of the trusts for alleged acts of corruption never proven, would suddenly be so prone to demanding proof?
And, on the other hand, because signs of the modus operandi that the book recounts have been made known, again and again, for a long time. Or would they prefer not to remember the videos of Carlos Ahumada, René Bejarano and Carlos Imaz? From the carousel of deposits orchestrated by Alejandro Esquer? From the images of Pío and Martín López Obrador receiving envelopes with money from David León? From the recordings of Eva Cadena receiving cash, or of Julio Scherer asking Julio Villareal for it? Of the sentence of the Electoral Court against Delfina Gómez for discounting “contributions” to the employees of the municipality of Texcoco when he was mayor? In the light of these episodes, does it not acquire at least a certain plausibility The Cash King?
It is true that the book does not provide evidence. However, it offers a framework of interpretation that allows known cases to be inserted into a plot, accommodate them in a broader context and, above all, eager to be more and better investigated. We do not know if it is true, we do know that its relevance is indisputable. What did that three-time candidate live on who did not report income, who did not pay taxes, of whom there is no trace of a checkbook or bank account? How was the movement that led to Morena financed, the platform from which he eventually catapulted himself to the presidency of the Republic? If it’s not how the book tells it, then what was it?
That López Obrador had an apparently simple lifestyle does not resolve these doubts. Austere and honest are not synonyms. You can be austere without being honest and honest without being austere. Corruption does not only consist of getting rich illegally, it can also consist of diverting money from the treasury to support a family or a team, even if it is “modestly”, or to pay for the construction of a personal political project. The Cash King doesn’t really provide answers, but still leaves us with a lot of questions.
__________________
Publisher’s note:
The opinions in this article are the sole responsibility of the author.
