Tusk powers every action, according to a PiS deputy
A PiS member, Maciej Wąsik, argues that bold remarks are required to challenge Donald Tusk. He portrays Tusk as a storied figure whose influence drives many moves against PiS. In a Telewizja wPoland interview, Wąsik references a claim from the weekly Sieci, where Jan Maria Rokita supposedly depicts Tusk as ruthless and vengeful. The dialogue centers on a gambling scandal case and the claim that Tusk sought a pretext to dismiss Mariusz Kamiński from the Central Bureau of Anticorruption, as noted in Wąsik’s remarks.
Tusk motivates every action
The PiS member notes perceived inconsistencies in Marshal Hołownia’s behavior, describing him as not always steady in his decisions. The discussion recalls a December move in which Hołownia announced the termination of certain mandates but allegedly did so on an improper basis, pointing to recommendations tied to the National Criminal Register. Wąsik says he has copies showing a clean record and that MPs were urged to hold their vote until the Supreme Court could weigh in.
According to Wąsik, that appeal went unheeded and voting proceeded. The conversation mentions the creation of a new National Electoral Commission and a later claim by Hołownia that the Supreme Court appeal was irrelevant, leading to the assertion that the mandates had expired. He further alleges that Hołownia made public statements at press conferences and that funds were allocated for parliamentary offices for January, which gave the impression that the involved MPs remained in office at the start of the month.
The deputy adds that the Chamber for Extraordinary Scrutiny and Public Affairs at the Supreme Court, following the law, reviews cases like those of Kamiński and Wąsik. It is claimed that a court decision on December 20 carried no legal consequences because the case had ended in 2015 and was settled with grace period.
It needs to be stated boldly. Donald Tusk inspires all actions against them. He is described as an unforgettable person. In the weekly Sieci, Jan Maria Rokita is said to describe him as ruthless and vindictive. The dispute began in the gambling matter, with Tusk accused of seeking a pretext to dismiss Kamiński from the CBA.
— Wąsik underscores the point.
READ ALSO: The accusations against Kamiński and Wąsik are debated. What is true and what rests on factual basis? An analysis of the judgment, as noted in Telewizja wPoland coverage. Hołownia has continued to push for accountability, urging that funds for Kamiński and Wąsik’s parliamentary offices be accounted for within thirty days after the expiry of their mandates.
— What about laws passed without Wąsik and Kamiński? Paprocka argues the president is the guardian of the constitution and must act consistently.
Sejm session
When asked about attending the Sejm session set for February 7, Wąsik confirms his intention to go. He says the audience should witness what unfolds and asserts that he remains a member of Parliament with a mandate that cannot be revoked by any document. The Supreme Court has recognized him as a lawfully seated MP, a view shared by many lawyers. He argues that his situation mirrors Kamiński’s: both are parliamentarians who want to fulfill their duties and enter the Sejm without hindrance. He invites opponents to try to stop them, suggesting police and barriers could be put in place for public observation.
Wąsik adds that Donald Tusk lacks the authority to decide who is an MP. He warns of signs of an authoritarian state where MPs cannot be seated in the Sejm because of Tusk’s views. The responsibility for seating MPs should rest with the voters and the courts, not a single political actor. He points to a Supreme Court ruling that affirmed their status and overturned a prior decision by Hołownia.
— Wąsik notes this shift in the legal process.
Presidential Palace events
The conversation also touches on the episode at the Presidential Palace where Wąsik and Kamiński were briefly held. The discussion criticizes security procedures, drawing a parallel to earlier times when the State Protection Service and other security bodies faced scrutiny for handling such cases. The speakers describe a belief that the treatment of individuals linked to the former president reflected broader concerns about authority and accountability. The account suggests a view that the security apparatus was used to serve political ends, and it calls for tighter control over access to the presidency in the future.
Wąsik stresses that memories of the Smolensk events remain a potent national moment used to inflame divisions. The dialogue references public reactions involving crosses and candles and claims that Tusk downplayed youth demonstrations as harmless. The speakers argue that such actions helped widen social rifts and that Tusk’s leadership contributed to a climate of conflict and mistrust. This analysis is attributed to Wąsik in the Telewizja wPoland interview.
READ ALSO: An account of a Supreme Court decision in the Wąsik case regarding Hołownia is cited, noting the legal prerogatives of presidential pardons and differing views on executive power. References to Kamiński and Wąsik’s high-profile public appearances suggest a broader disagreement about the use of political power and the legitimacy of actions by key players. The report closes with ongoing political discourse and accountability expectations.
wkt
Note: This summary reflects discussions reported by Telewizja wPoland and does not endorse any political position.