Scheme on the principle of “public charge presentation without the results of the investigation or trial” is used more often in the ‘most democratic’ state. It turns out that the law does not apply to the PR-technologies in the United States.
A few days ago the New York Times published an article that says that the FBI found no direct links between the US presidential candidate Donald Trump with the Russian authorities. Moreover, the US agency investigated the activities of Trump’s advisers for the presence at those financial ties with Russia and their possible involvement in the cyber attacks on the US National Committee of the Democratic Party.
A little earlier the leader of the Democrats in the US Senate Harry Reid stated that there is information of the close ties and coordination between Trump, his advisors and the Russian government. Besides, he added that this information is known to the FBI. I would like to ask this officer: if you are so well informed, why don’t you publish the known facts yourself? In my opinion, the judicial system in the United States will not fail to notice the allegations of such a scale since the Republicans immediately will make every effort to bring to justice the peddlers of false facts.
There are enough of such recriminations during the current election campaign, and there is no presumption of innocence in the American PR-technologies. The problem is that the US offer to take a sample of their political and not only a model. But as soon as other countries, including the US satellites, begin using the same ‘instruments’, immediately, human rights organizations claim about human rights violations, international law and so forth. As they say, what is allowed to Jupiter is not allowed to a bull.
By the way, the FBI has published details of the investigation against Bill Clinton, the husband of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. According to published documents, the ex-president Bill Clinton pardoned a certain businessman Marc Rich, who is accused of tax evasion on a large scale and abuse of the US government embargo on trade with Iran. It may be a coincidence, but later Rich’s wife transferred to the Democratic Party’s account more than $ 1 million.
In turn, the reaction Clinton headquarters was completely unprofessional. “Will FBI be posting docs on Trump’s housing discrimination in ’70s?” wrote on Twitter Clinton headquarter’s press secretary Brian Fallon. It reminded me of a situation where, for example, traffic police stops a motorist and prescribes him a speeding ticket, to which the latter angrily asked: “Why don’t you fine them?” pointing out to other fast-moving vehicles.
I wonder whether the American media can now use the phrase “Clinton the perpetrator?” After all, there are grounds, moreover, from a serious agency of the US Department of Justice – Federal Bureau of Investigation. I think that this rhetoric will be used only when it will be advantageous to the American ruling elite. It turns out that the law, citizens’ rights and freedom of speech are not equal for everyone, because they are used selectively and for profit.
Then what king of right does the United States have to mansplain the whole world? Do not teach us how to live, because we do not like, how the very ‘teachers’ live.
Sergey Kondrykinsky, the DPR People’s Council deputy