Hernán Gómez Bruera, a journalist and political analyst, criticized the book “Neither Vengeance nor Forgiveness,” written by Julio Scherer Ibarra, former legal advisor to the Federal Executive, and stated that the work does not present evidence to support its claims and that, far from clarifying the allegations about his management, it generates confusion and self-incrimination. “It is not specific about the cases it mentions and does not provide evidence; its strategy is to blur the information and confuse the reader,” affirmed the author of “Treason in the Palace” for Aristegui en Vivo. According to Gómez Bruera, Scherer avoids responding clearly to the criticisms and omits detailing the facts he describes in his book. The journalist pointed out that in the recent interview Scherer gave to Televisa, the former legal advisor did not clarify the supposed conflicts of interest or the details of his participation in high-impact business cases. Among them, he mentioned cases such as Juan Collado, Alonso Ancira, Interjet, Cruz Azul, Oro Negro, and Aleatica, where, according to Gómez Bruera, Scherer would have played a relevant role that is not clearly reflected or evidenced in his work. “The book is basically to smear everyone with mud, and in the end, it leaves its own topic unaddressed; it is surprising how he avoids giving concrete answers and how he presents no proof of what he affirms,” said Gómez Bruera. In his analysis, the journalist criticized that Scherer recognizes in the book the intervention of family members in some of these cases but minimizes his own role and does not document his claims with invoices, quotes, or verifiable evidence, which makes it difficult to verify what he recounts. The book confuses rather than clarifies and leaves the door open for new investigations, its only argument is to deny the obvious without support. Gómez Bruera explained how the work does not address in detail specific cases like that of Cruz Azul, where payments and quotes from law firms linked to Scherer's family are mentioned but omitted by the book; in Interjet, his alleged recommendation of law firms is described without documenting the prior agreements. In the case of Juan Collado and Alonso Ancira, he said, supposed influence peddling is alleged without being backed by evidence; in Oro Negro and Aleatica, family conflicts of interest are acknowledged, but without explaining Scherer's direct role. The journalist pointed out that these omissions generate a confusing effect because the reader cannot differentiate between proven facts and accounts lacking documentary support. He never understood well what his role was; he was too busy with other things and his office was barely in the National Palace; the work shows a constant mix of public and private interest. Hernán Gómez recalled that the second edition of his book “Treason in the Palace,” now in paperback format, includes a prologue written by himself, in which he narrates the effects of the judicial harassment he was subjected to due to the publication of his work and the difficulties that journalists in Mexico face when covering high-impact cases. Furthermore, Gómez Bruera criticized that Scherer does not address in his book the intervention of the Attorney General's Office or the attempts at judicialization that involved lawyers close to him, which, according to the journalist, evidences the lack of transparency and confusion about Scherer's actions while he was legal advisor. “The book (‘Neither Vengeance nor Forgiveness’) leaves the possibility of new investigations open, because there is more than enough material for an independent scrutiny of Scherer's actions,” assured Gómez Bruera, regarding the evidentiary gaps and evasion of responsibilities he identifies in the work. Scherer's work, insisted Gómez Bruera, demonstrates how a former public official can mix public and private affairs while controlling the media narrative of his tenure. Finally, Hernán Gómez underscored the importance of critical and evidence-based journalism in the face of public figures. “This book demonstrates that superficial interviews are not enough; review, documentation, and questioning are required; the reader must be able to differentiate between narrative and verifiable facts,” he concluded.
