Lobato had decided to resign since Monday evening

It was a recommendation that was made to him that very day, and these were the people he trusted the most, and Monday evening, it was the most plausible option. That’s why ABC informed its readers that Lobato was considering resigning. But someone who had influence over him asked him a question: “Did you do something wrong? No, then wait and go to the primaries.

In the morning he made the decision to wait, probably influenced by the messages sent by those who thought that the problem that occurred after ABC’s information was not at his house, but in La Moncloa. And he called it appearance without questions of two minutes and fifty seconds which public opinion did not very well understand, but which represented a rectification compared to his messages in the media on Monday morning.

After hours of diluted explanations and facing internal pressure to withdraw from the party leadership in Madrid, Lobato appeared before the media on Tuesday and, far from resigning, denounced the ongoing internal “lynching”. see attenuated. Finally, a day later and after having recognized in a letter “the serious confrontations and divisions which were being born within the party”, he presented his resignation.

This is the Detailed timeline of the fall of Juan Lobatofrom the moment when the tax problems of the couple of the president of the Community of Madrid came to light until 2:20 p.m. this Wednesday, when she announced her resignation. Nearly 72 frantic hours since ABC released its exclusive Sunday night:

Although the case became known the day before, when ‘eldiario.es’ revealed that Díaz Ayuso’s partner had been denounced for the commission of several crimes, on March 13 ‘El Mundo’ published that the Madrid prosecutor’s office had “offered” a pact ” to Alberto González Amador in exchange for his guilty plea for alleged tax fraud of 350,000 euros.

The same March 13, ‘La Sexta’ contradicted the newspaper ‘El Mundo’ and reported that it was González Amador’s lawyer, Carlos Neira, who proposed a compliant agreement to the prosecutor’s office, and not the other way around. Around midnight, ‘Cadena Ser’ expands on this information and reveals that the lawyer proposed an agreement to the prosecution after recognizing that “two crimes were certainly committed against the Public Treasury”. The media cite extracts from the email that Neira sends to the prosecution.

Although this same information is published in different media, none reproduces the confidential document. This is the content of one of the messages – a photograph of the confession sent by González Amador’s lawyer to the prosecutor in charge of the case – that Óscar López’s chief of staff sends to the leader of the PSOE-M to be projected on the Madrid camera. morning of March 14. Lobato refuses and López’s right-hand man tells him not to worry, that he will pass it on to “Angélica Rubio, the journalist who discovered Judge Peinado’s two ID cards”; who at the time directed “elplural.com” and who, months later, would be placed by the PSOE on the board of directors of RTVE.

It was not until more than an hour later that this newspaper, at 9:06 a.m., published the document. The title is as follows: “Here is the letter from Ayuso’s boyfriend’s lawyer requesting approval from the prosecution. » In the news, the newspaper finally publishes an image with the lawyer’s letter. In other words, the document was made public after Óscar López’s chief of staff decided to disclose it on “elplural.com”.

The Supreme Court accuses the State Attorney General (FGE), Álvaro García Ortiz, of the alleged crime of revealing secrets in the case of Ayuso’s boyfriend. This is the first FGE to be investigated by the High Court.

Although the attorney general’s indictment shook the political debate, it was only a few days later, on October 30, that a turning point occurred in the case. That day, the Supreme Court ordered the UCO of the Civil Guard to enter and search García Ortiz’s office and empty and seize his devices. The week after the recording, Lobato went to the notary.

This newspaper puts forward in its digital edition information which will make its front page on Monday, November 25 and which headlines: “Moncloa disclosed the secret document of Ayuso’s boyfriend and tried to implicate Lobato”. It detailed how Pedro Sánchez’s right-hand man, through his chief of staff, would have given Lobato the confidential document of Ayuso’s partner to try to act against her.

That same Sunday evening, Lobato confronted the ABC exclusive and published a statement on the Bluesky social network denying this information because he only certified before a notary that “neither the Madrid socialists nor Moncloa had received any information from the public prosecutor’s office.” He defends this same version the next morning, in different television interviews, even if he modifies his explanations throughout the day.

This newspaper publishes a second part with the meeting that the journalists of this house Juan Fernández-Miranda and Javier Chicote had with the secretary general of the PSOE of Madrid, during which he admitted the facts. “That’s what you said,” he told ABC reporters.

Faced with internal criticism of his party and information published in various media reporting his resignation, Juan Lobato summoned the press on Tuesday at 9:30 a.m., but did not resign. Instead, he defers to the leadership of the PSOE, denounces an internal “lynching” and warns: “It seems that the bad guy is the one who decides not to do things wrong.”

The words of the then leader of the PSOE-M are not appreciated in the party and, even if the members of the executive of Pedro Sánchez and the PSOE try to avoid speaking out on the controversy, those who decide to speak show the unease existing within the party. party. His organizing secretary, Santos Cerdán, challenged Lobato to name names: “If he talks about lynchings, he should say who.”

Finally, Juan Lobato gave in to pressure from the socialist milieu and resigned from his post as secretary general of the PSOE in Madrid after the ABC exclusivity. The abandonment of middle positions precipitates his definitive departure, with a very harsh letter in which he presents himself as a free verse within a party dominated by the Sanchistas. “My way of doing politics is not the same and perhaps sometimes incompatible with that of the majority of the current leadership of my party,” he admitted in his resignation letter.