The Supreme Court of Justice is consistent in its absurd rulings on the so-called "suitable evidence" necessary to prosecute the deputies. And it is that the Financial Analysis Unit (UAF) detected what its officials presumed was a money laundering operation, through a company in which a deputy is a shareholder. The report of this operation was sent to the Public Prosecutor's Office (MP), but since the deputies cannot be investigated by an ordinary prosecutor's office -as happens with any mortal-, the file was sent to the Court, which is where the criminals are prosecuted. deputies. But it turns out that the magistrates criticized the fact that the MP did not carry out any type of preliminary investigation that would reveal a situation beyond the suspicion raised by the UAF report. And here is the matter: if the MP investigates, the case can be annulled by the Court, precisely because this is the only instance that can investigate the deputies, but, at the same time, the Court claims for an investigation that provides you with proof of the crime, knowing that prosecutors cannot do so. And so, in this legal and jurisdictional gibberish, the magistrates pay and ensure that impunity flourishes without any setbacks. – LA PRENSA, May. 10.