Nayib Bukele Responde A F..T M Muy Claro

In the vibrant tapestry of a free society, where ideas and opinions dance in the open air, questions are the lifeblood that courses through the veins of democracy. Yes, you have every right to ask, inquire, and express what's on your mind. After all, this is a land of freedom. But, my friends, just as you have the right to ask, I also have the right to respond.

Embracing the Art of Dialogue

"Did you answer the question?" Ah, indeed I did. You see, there are two facets to this coin: what I know and what I believe. If you wish to answer your own questions, you are well within your rights to do so. But allow me to join the conversation, for isn't that what dialogue is all about?

The stage was set, and Jessica Ávalos from Factor Magazine took the mic, ready to grill me. "Mr. President," she began, "you, in your capacity as president, have called upon the populace to vote for your party. However, Article 84 of the electoral code prohibits using your position for partisan politics. Why do you continue to flout electoral rules?"

Now, I must admit, the logic of this question puzzled me. You see, the same media outlets that have been covering every move of lawmakers and magistrates seemed to forget that I'm not a candidate for anything. Can someone explain why you give extensive coverage to judges of the electoral tribunal, such as Julio Olivo, who openly supports a political party that opposes us?

Yes, it's true that I have an interest in new ideas gaining more seats in the legislature. I'd be hypocritical to say otherwise. But when you provide substantial coverage to magistrates like Olivo, who, by the way, isn't a neutral judge but a partisan one, shouldn't you question his actions as well? He's out there counting votes, not me. Have you ever questioned the impartiality of judges like Olivo and Wellman, who are entrusted with the responsibility of tallying the votes?

Unmasking Double Standards

Someone might argue, "But Mr. President, you were elected with a party, so naturally, you want that party to succeed." That's true, and the attorney general wasn't elected through political parties, yet he was a member and financier of ARENA. Did anyone ever ask him why he was attacking new ideas and advocating for traditional parties to maintain their power balance?

Here's another twist: why did they stop the investigation into his finances when the newspaper Faro requested it? Was it because they knew it would damage the credibility of their pamphlets right before the elections? These are questions that deserve answers, just as much as the questions aimed at me.

A Level Playing Field

Let's talk about clear rules. In the United States, campaign financing rules are stringent. Contributions are limited, and individuals can't donate as much as they can here. But guess what? They have something called "Super PACs." These groups run massive campaigns in favor of candidates or parties. It's a way to exercise their freedom of speech.

Now, some Democrats didn't want Super PACs, while Republicans did. They debated it, and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Super PACs, citing freedom of expression. Democrats eventually embraced Super PACs too. Why didn't you question them for adopting something they initially criticized?

The Weight of Responsibility

I've been careful during this press conference not to mention poll numbers, even though I have them. Why? Because the law prohibits disclosing poll numbers once the polling stations close. I've also refrained from openly endorsing any party. But you, my dear journalists, you're drenched in the colors of traditional parties. I, on the other hand, don no party's attire.

And let's not forget the numerous times you've covered the statements of arena's president or FMLN's leaders, who complain about not getting enough coverage. It's as if you want us to shut ourselves in our rooms and not say a word. Well, how about we all lock ourselves away? If it's what you wish, I'd gladly oblige. But let's not forget who's been putting the pause button on everything - it hasn't been us.

In Conclusion

In the realm of free expression, I respect your right to ask, inquire, and write as you please. This is, after all, a country where freedom reigns. But let's remember that the beauty of democracy lies in its dialogue, its open debate, and its willingness to confront inconsistencies wherever they may be found. So, yes, you have every right to question me, but I also have the right to respond. After all, it's a two-way street, my friends.