October 25, 2021

The Queens County Citizen

Complete Canadian News World

An investigation has been launched into Navalny’s “fraud” in denouncing the Kremlin’s “hysteria”

Alexeï Navalny, faisant dos à un mur, a la main droite levée à la hauteur de son visage.

The Russian Investigative Committee said in a statement that Navalny was suspected of spending 356 million rubles (C $ 6.2 million at current rates) for personal use on donations collected by “several” organizations. Non-profit.

Officials are specifically referring to donations to the Anti-Corruption Fund and five other human rights organizations, including Mr. Navalny. Actually the director.

The committee of inquiry stated that Alex Navalny had used this amount For the acquisition of personal and physical goods, as well as for the payment of expenses [y compris des vacances à l’étranger].

Russian law provides for up to 10 years in prison for this crime.

It looks like that [Vladimir] Putin suffers from hysteria.

Alexei Navalny

On his Twitter account, the latter called his supporters Ridiculous This new survey by donating to its organizations.

The new case is alleged to have been linked to his suspicious poisoning in Siberia in late August, in which the Kremlin claimed to have been attacked by a nerve agent on orders.

Advertising war

Russia says Alexei Navalny was in a coma on a plane in Siberia, and that there was no evidence of such a crime, despite the results of three European laboratories confirming he had taken poison.

They tried to send me to jail so I was not dead and then looked for my killers, Navalny said Tuesday.

The rival released a video last week of a telephone conversation with a member of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (FSB) in which he thought he was talking to an intelligence officer, describing those services. Russian specials Alexei Navalny was well poisoned.

READ  Hundreds of pilot whales die in record mass stranding in Australia

Authorities called the conversation False verification, But never denied that the rival interlocutor was in fact an agent.