If they have all united against Andrés Manuel, he has the minimum right to respond to his rivals.
According to him National Electoral Institute, President Lopez Obrador interferes in an illegal way – even unconstitutional – by questioning at press conferences mornings the alliance between PAN, the PRI and the PRD.
Why is it bad for a politician to talk about politics, without offending anyone, by the way, and saying exactly what has been repeated for years, even decades in relation to the fact that the first two parties, those of the PRIANHave they been exactly the same because they have defended the common interests of their true bosses?
I think the INE does not understand freedom of expression. Nor, neither, the right to replica.
Andres ManuelIn reality, he does not enter the debate simply by wanting to make known to an alliance that may or may not be successful – personally I would like him to present very strong candidates in 2021 and to balance the enormous power of Brunette– but, rather, the president of Mexico exercises the elementary right of reply since the sum of these three parties is born, as they have expressed, not from the desire to have more votes or from a common government project, but nothing else from the intention, openly declared by their promoters , to defeat AMLO, whom one of the PRI, PAN and PRD bosses detests, the openly profascist businessman Claudio X. González.
If the opposition, in agreement with the worst of the business sector, has decided that the midterm elections of 2021 will be a all against AMLOThe least the president of Mexico can do is express his position. The right of reply could also be called legitimate defense.
Right of reply, in effect. Because in no way is it an exaggeration all against President López Obrador: This has been decided not only by the PRI, the PAN, the PRD and businessmen, but also an important part of the media, notably a leading internet newspaper, The universal, who has taken advantage of what may be an excess – but perhaps not – of a certain collaborator of public television.
Indeed, Stephanie Veloz he probably fell into bad taste by questioning the clown Brozo, but what has followed in the newspaper owned by Juan Francisco Ealy Ortiz it was a lynching already immoral against the collaborator of the Canal 11.
Criticizing her once, twice was fine, but a whole campaign against the aforementioned woman, whom, by the way, not a few supporters of the lynching have insulted with vulgarities in social networks?
The harsh and already excessive blows that she has received are not directed precisely against the young woman who, in the worst case, made a mistake – but I am not sure that it was.
The brutal attack led by The universal against the analyst of a very low-rated TV show is directed against AMLO.
Because, to criticize Estefanía, The universal has not only resorted to declared enemies of the 4T, but to repeat – and repeat and repeat and repeat – very vulgar expressions of the clown Brozo against the president of Mexico, who deserves respect as the ruler of our country and also as a person.
I wonder what he seeks or what he defends The universal by using anything to repeat insults against López Obrador.
