Fidesz MEP: EU rule-of-law debate ‘lacks credibility’
Balazs Hidvéghi, an MEP of Hungary’s ruling Fidesz, told the European Parliament’s plenary debate that the European Union’s rule-of-law debates were lacking any credibility.
In a Facebook post, Hidvéghi said the Socialist government in Spain was trying to sweep crimes such as sedition and misuse of public funds under the rug. Meanwhile, “Hungary’s right-wing government is facing withdrawal of funds on trumped-up charges,” he said.
In the video posted on Facebook, Hidvéghi said “those defending this Sanchez deal now suggest that those crimes were never really committed.” If they had not been committed, the Socialists should have raised their voices then; if they had been, the Socialists were trading the law and Spanish constitution just to remain in power, he said.
“Isn’t this the textbook example of a serious violation of the rule of law?”
Hidvéghi said amnesty was a tool for extraordinary situations. “Forming a government after an election is no extraordinary event”. “The deafening silence here in Brussels and Strasbourg of all the left-wing tenors of the rule of law is incredible.”
Turning to Juan Fernando Lopez Aguilar, the head of the EP’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), Hidvéghi asked: “Aren’t you ashamed for trying to defend the indefensible?”
The whole affair was, Hidvéghi said, a crystal clear proof “that all of the talk in the house of the rule of law has absolutely no credibility.”
Source: MTI
please make a donation here
Hot news
Survey: Fidesz retains lead in polls
VIDEO: ‘Now You See Me 3’ cast and crew say goodbye to Budapest
POLITICO: The price MOL would accept to abandon Russian oil in Hungary
BREAKING! Three-year minimum wage agreement set to impact everyone’s pay in Hungary 🔄
Is Hungary’s safety at risk? Police face serious challenges
Budapest Mayor Karácsony reveals candidates for deputy positions
2 Comments
Textbook Whataboutism …
Whataboutism is a fallacy most closely related to the ad hominem fallacy, wherein a person responds to an accusation by attacking the person making it.
It is a fallacy because even if the counter-accusation is true, it doesn’t defend whoever is being accused (in this case, Hungary) in the first place. At best, it shows that both parties behaved shamefully. And, of course, two wrongs do not make a right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Hidvéghi, made his point out loud. “Aren’t you ashamed for trying to defend the indefensible?” No answer!! Hmm…..
The EU rule of law lacks anything credible, it’s a joke and the naysayers, are jokes too..