Alvise: four months of promised audios and zero deliveries

Alvise promised audios and raffles: four months of nothing

How long does a promise without a delivery date hold up? Four months, according to the count that has been repeated since election night. Alvise Pérez, a Member of the European Parliament, announced a revelation capable of bringing down politicians in Congress and the Government, and since then, not an audio, not a video, not a name. The commitment was blunt: as soon as he had the immunity credential, he would spill the beans. With the credential in hand, the argument mutated: before publishing anything, the law must be reformed to avoid ending up in jail. The sequence that mobilised 800,000 votes has become an elastic calendar, and those who voted for him are starting to watch the clock.

What Alvise promised and what he has delivered

The package was ambitious. Audios, videos and alleged crimes that would bring down Government and Congress officials. Nothing has seen the light. First it was the lack of legal protection; the seat arrived and with it parliamentary immunity, and the second argument replaced the first: the law must be reformed to avoid jail before releasing the material. In the meantime, according to his critics, the MEP has voted for initiatives that were not in his programme and has fuelled expectations of a general election that, by his own account, did not interest him. The result is a trail of announcements without delivery that has now lasted four months.

The €100,000 raffle: two winners and no proof

The €100,000 raffle announced among trinc is the other open front. Two winners have been announced, always according to the organiser's own version, and no public evidence allows verification that they exist. Suspicion circulates without much elaboration: that the prize stays at home, that one is for Alvise and the other for Pérez Alvise, or that there is simply nothing to share out. A raffle that, according to the circulating account, was interrupted halfway and resumed with an immediate winner does not help dispel doubts either. The money, claim those who trinc the matter, was never seen.

Madeira Invest Club: the promotion of a product that left losses

The third front has a name. At the Madeira Invest Club, an investment event, the MEP intervened to promote a cryptocurrency product. According to the accusations spread afterwards, thousands of attendees would have lost their money and the video of the intervention would have remained hidden until its publication by third parties. Those who support that version estimate at €100,000 what was obtained in the operation and assure that the material has already been sent to the Supreme Court. With no known judicial resolution, all this remains in the realm of denunciation.

From praying outside a clinic to abortion as a right in the EU

A year and a half separates two images that are hard to reconcile. The first: the then candidate on his knees outside an abortion clinic in Madrid. The second: the MEP using the 800,000 votes received to promote abortion as a fundamental right in the European Union. The shift has become the most repeated argument by those who accuse him of having instrumentalised discontent: if the position changes depending on the forum, his word is worthless. And in politics, when your word is worthless, you still get paid for the seat.

The 800,000 votes and the fight for the useful vote

Here two narratives cross. One holds that the real objective of this operation is to split the vote against the Government and thus keep Pedro Sánchez in La Moncloa until 2031; the other responds that anything that breaks the clientelist network of the parties — red, blue or purple, it doesn't matter — is welcome, even if only a little. In between lies an uncomfortable fact: many of those who voted for him did not expect a programme, but a punishment. And the punishment, for now, has not reached anyone except the voters themselves.

The Venezuelan mirror: voting when nothing changes

There is a parallel that is repeated insistently. According to the account of a participant in the debate, in Venezuela the ruling party imposed itself with turnouts around 20%; when the opposition believed that this time there were options, turnout rose to nearly 50% and the result, according to that same version, changed nothing. Transferred to Spain, the argument is that abstention no longer expresses discontent, but resignation: no one expects voting to alter the distribution and the system sustains itself by inertia. After a natural catastrophe with massive material losses and a highly questioned Government, the question of whether voting is worthwhile remains unanswered. And that is exactly where the protest vote fits.

Why many voters see no difference with the other parties

The most repeated defence does not deny the facts: it relativises them. All parties promise and fail to deliver, they say. PP, PSOE, VOX or whichever formation has been doing the same for decades: promise until you get in. From that logic, disillusionment with Alvise is not a separate case, but the confirmation of a system in which votes are captured with smoke and amortised over four years. The argument has a practical problem: if everything is the same, nothing changes, and the one who takes the seat always ends up being the same.

There remains the consolation of the privileged. While the law that would let him speak is reformed, the seat is paid on time and the clock keeps ticking. At this rate, the revelation that was going to bring down the Government will reach retirement before it reaches Congress.

---

Legal notice: the accusations about investment promotions, raffles and payments collected in this text are statements spread without any known judicial resolution.