Patrick Cohen denounces the “distorted” replays of his remarks by MP Charles Alloncle in a letter to the fee of inquiry into public broadcasting | EUROtoday

Journalist Patrick Cohen despatched a letter on Monday, December 22, to MPs who’re members of the parliamentary fee of inquiry into public broadcasting. He deplored, six days after his listening to earlier than the identical fee, {that a} “a certain number of [ses] declarations » have “been disguised, distorted or commented on in a malicious manner” by the rapporteur, the elected Ciottiste Charles Alloncle (Union of Rights for the Republic, UDR, Hérault).

In this letter revealed Tuesday by Le Figarowhose authenticity the journalist confirmed to Agence France-Presse, he factors to messages revealed by the rapporteur on the social community X and an interview that the latter gave to the YouTube channel Les Incorrectibles. These phrases ” seems[nt] cast doubt on the usefulness of [son] hearing and the sincerity of the approach undertaken.

“I deeply regret having had to defend my impartiality and my rigor in the face of accusations which were so devoid of them. I still dare to hope that my answers will be taken into account by your committee, more than in the current communication from the rapporteur”writes the journalist at the end of this text, after returning to several assertions by Mr. Alloncle.

Patrick Cohen returns, for instance, to the feedback linked to the printed of a video recorded with out his data, and with out the data of his colleague Thomas Legrand, by which they seem on the restaurant with executives of the Socialist Party: “ Mr. Alloncle maintains that “at the request of journalists from The Incorrect [qui a publié la vidéo]a bailiff’s report established that, despite editing cuts, the remarks were neither truncated nor distorted.” This statement is inaccurate, the “bailiff’s report” as it was revealed by a post from a journalist from The Incorrect and read by me during the hearing does not include any of the terms used by the rapporteur. »

The journalist then addresses one other expression from the rapporteur: “ Mr. Alloncle affirms that regarding the murder of young Thomas in Crépol I “expressed NO regret” relating to an editorial the place I “minimized the facts”. It doesn’t appear to me that these two factors emerged from our discussions. Furthermore, in the identical put up [publié sur X]Mr. Alloncle signifies that I “qualified Thomas’s relatives who came to show their pain in Romans-sur-Isère as “neo-Nazis”. This assertion is fake, and I pointed it out through the listening to. The ultra-right activists, a few of whom recognized by the police authorities as belonging to the neo-Nazi motion, weren’t “close to Thomas”. And they didn’t come to “show their pain”, however, armed and hooded, to unfold violence within the metropolis of La Monnaie in Romans. »

“Extremely serious grievance”

Patrick Cohen returns, within the following a part of his letter, to an interview given by Charles Alloncle to the YouTube channel Les Incorrectibles. The rapporteur describes his listening to as ““perfectly lunar” and thus summarizes his interpretation of the snatches of sentences heard in one of many stolen movies of The Incorrect : “We will use all our means, the public service antennas, to discredit Rachida Dati.” The rapporteur is free to make the accusation, however it might nonetheless be mandatory that, just by respecting adversarial issues, the accused be capable of reply.”writes the journalist. Before persevering with: “However, this question, which carries an extremely serious grievance, was not asked to me during my hearing. And I do not believe that it was demonstrated during this same hearing that M^me Rachida Dati has suffered unfavorable or denigrating treatment on public service broadcasts. »

Finally, the political editorialist from France Inter addresses a final element of the same interview: “ Mr. Alloncle deplores that we have “filed a complaint” and “shamelessly attacked colleagues (…) for a completely fallacious reason”. I knew that by finishing up their investigations, commissions of inquiry can uncover felony acts. I didn’t know that their rapporteur had the ability to decree what’s authorized and what’s not…”annoys Patrick Cohen, earlier than writing: “ More severely, by taking sides in ongoing authorized proceedings, relating to an object (the stolen movies) that he himself positioned on the heart of his investigation, I take into account that the rapporteur has severely disregarded the precept of separation of powers. And discredited prematurely of the political conclusions that he appears to have already written. »