During a discussion on a televised program, Maciej Wąsik asserted that Szymon Hołownia placed trust in Donald Tusk. He claimed that in their case the moves to end the coalition mandate and to block entry to the Sejm were carried out under Tusk’s influence. He added a blunt remark that in politics, if you work with Donald Tusk, there are no similarities.
On November 27, a weekly publication reported that Hołownia appeared on a Collegium Humanum student list, although he did not attend classes. The claim sparked debate about the nature of his involvement with the institution.
An investigative journalist noted on social media that the case files contained an admission document signed by Hołownia, drawing renewed scrutiny of the candidate’s ties to the school.
The matter was raised in the Sejm, where the Marshal faced questions about the allegations and their possible political consequences for the coalition. The episode touched on questions of trust and the handling of sensitive information.
The discussion centered on the seriousness of the allegations and the possibility that leaked material or the involvement of state institutions could undermine confidence within the coalition. The interlocutors stressed that the origin of the information must be understood for the public to judge the matter fairly.
Wąsik’s comment
The topic drew further commentary from a televised broadcast, where a member of the governing party weighed in. He argued that in such a high-stakes political game, events could be deliberate rather than accidental, and he expressed certainty about that view.
He drew an analogy with the year 2005, when the left-wing candidate faced a public controversy known as the Jarocka case that many believed shifted public opinion and altered the course of the presidential race, helping Donald Tusk. He urged careful analysis to see whether any parallels exist with the current situation.
Hołownia stated that there was likely a leak and that someone might have known about his connections to Collegium Humanum, and that the material could have been leaked. He pointed to the credibility of a journalist who has access to the materials and whose podcast presented certain facts and testimonies as part of a broader discussion. He urged journalists to seek clarification on what was agreed and how such arrangements could have prevented the outcome.
There are no similarities with Tusk
The commentator suggested that there may still be undisclosed matters in the case. In his view, Hołownia is currently a victim of the controversy; he said that Hołownia endured pressure before, and in this instance he allegedly faced steps aimed at ending the mandate and restricting Sejm access, allegedly under Tusk’s influence.
Hołownia, for his part, disagreed and asked for clarity about what was agreed and how the situation could have unfolded as it did. He indicated that journalists should question the specifics behind the statements and the evidence cited.
As the discussion continued, the topic remained provocative, with observers noting that the case could become a litmus test for confidence within the coalition. The dialogue underscored the importance of verifying sources and the broader implications for public trust in political processes.