太丟臉了！納吉被華爾街日報嘲笑弱智！叫納吉的代表律師回去好好幫他上課，搞清楚一馬公司醜聞報導的內容狀況才來跟他們說話！

難怪納吉講了一整年，始終提不起勇氣告華爾街日報誹謗！他都忙著找地洞鑽了，哪還有時間提告？

納吉羅斯瑪不但讓全世界瞧不起，連他身邊的幕僚、律師、內閣也統統被他連累，被世人譏笑為弱智、幼稚、腦殘，尤其是納吉的代表律師莫哈默哈法立贊寫信要求華爾街日報解釋它的新聞來源時，被華爾街日報噴了一臉屁！

華爾街日報勸告納吉的代表律師：你聽該先替你的老闆上上課，讓他明白《新聞報導》News Article和《觀點》Opinion之間的差別。搞懂了才來跟我們說話！

所以說，納吉的一馬公司貪污醜聞自從被華爾街日報及砂拉越報告踢爆，到現在已經超過一年，為什麼納吉遲遲不敢向這兩家國際媒體提出誹謗訴訟？現在大家搞明白了吧？

納吉的貪腐團隊連最基本的新聞學和國際法律專業常識都搞不清楚，哪裡敢去跟人家打官司？再說，砂拉越報告總編輯也開宗明義的挑戰納吉了，她就是看死納吉不敢提告，因為他心裡清楚得很，華爾街日報和砂拉越報告針對一馬公司貪污醜聞和納吉戶口26億貪污所得的報導是100%正確無誤，絕對經得起考驗的。納吉除了在三權絕對被他牢牢控制住的大馬國內虛張聲勢之外，絕對不敢到國際法庭提出任何訴訟，那是包死的。

華爾街日報的大老闆就是紐約道瓊斯公司，在去年接到納吉代表律師的信之後，毫不給面子的轟了回去。

道瓊斯在復函中說，他們根本無需對納吉解釋什麼，他們針對納吉私人戶口的26億貪污所得已經寫得很清楚，就是來自一馬公司的不當資金。《你所說的要求我們解釋這項報導是新聞報導還是純粹我們的觀點，我覺得你最好先教育你的客戶，先搞清楚新聞報導和觀點的差別在哪裡。》

道瓊斯公司說：《我覺得無論是新聞報導還是觀點意見，相關的報導已經做出相當明確的回答了，所以我們認為根本無需回答你這問題，你最好花心思自己從華爾街報導中去尋求真相。》

納吉的代表律師主要是詢問華爾街日報，要求對方清楚交代它的報導是否指明納吉私人戶口的26億贓款就是來自一馬公司，還是另有來源。

當然，納吉代表律師這項提問對全世界知道一馬公司醜聞的人來說都是廢話。道瓊斯公司根本都懶得回答你。全世界也都知道所謂中東皇室捐款云云，根本是幼稚得令人捧腹大笑的謊言；加上現在美國司法部公告全世界，一點也不含糊的說明那26億就是來自一馬公司不法資金的部份所得。

回想去年剛剛水鬼升城隍的阿末扎希還大言不慚的說，納吉的26億捐款是真的，他還見過那個捐獻者。現在大家肯定也很清楚了，阿末扎希確實見過那個《捐獻者》，不就是劉特佐咯。

然後，現在納吉朋黨幾乎要發動全國力量徹查洩密者了，現在的納吉簡直是杯弓蛇影，草木皆兵；疑神疑鬼，誰都信不過了。他還發動巫青團去告前任國家銀行總裁潔蒂等三人，指她們就是洩漏一馬公司機密給美國的《內鬼》。這下全世界的人又要看笑話了。

抓內鬼？徹查洩密者？為什麼不是查明洩密內容的真偽？那是因為已經曝光的一馬公司醜聞的種種醜陋真相全是真的，納吉無從狡辯！看他氣急敗壞的樣子，誰還相信他編織的鬼話？

最最尷尬的是，現在的納吉已經不敢隨心所欲陪地獄夫人河馬暢遊全世界揮霍享樂了。因為他知道已經有很多國際刑警正在等著他，他真的擔心出去了就回不來了。。。

Dow Jones & Company, which owns The Wall Street Journal , has told lawyers representing Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to explain to their client the difference between a news article and an opinion.

Dow Jones said there was also no need for the WSJ to explain its stance on reports alleging that RM2.6 billion of 1MDB-linked funds had been deposited into Najib's personal bank accounts.

"In your letter you 'seek confirmation as to whether it is [our] position as taken in [The News Article and The Opinion] that [your] Client misappropriated nearly US$700 million belonging to 1Malaysia Development Berhad'.

"We believe your request is unnecessary as The News Article and The Opinion speak for themselves," Dow Jones' counsel and chief compliance officer Jason P Conti wrote in a letter to the prime minister's lawyers.

Najib sent a letter to WSJ demanding the publication to clarify its stance on a July 2 news report titled "Malaysia leader's accounts probed" and an opinion piece on July 6 titled "Scandal in Malaysia".

The lawyers had wanted WSJ to clarify if it meant the alleged RM2.6 billion in Najib's accounts had come from 1MDB or unknown sources.

'Fair and accurate summary'

The Dow Jones letter, sighted by Malay Mail Online , pointed out the July 2 piece was a news article reporting facts, which said the source of the money was unknown. It also pointed out that the July 6 article is a commentary on those facts.

"As a result, it is quite clear The News Article is a fair and accurate summary of current events, and The Opinion includes reasonable commentary based on those facts.

"Any suggestion otherwise is misplaced and baseless," Conti said.

The letter also said Dow Jones would only appoint a legal representative in Malaysia if Najib takes action against it.

Dow Jones' reply was sent on Tuesday, the deadline set by Najib's lawyers.

Najib's legal letter to WSJ had been panned by lawyers as bizarre.

Umno lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun defended the letter, saying it was needed so as not to file a suit based on conjecture.

Najib has thus far denied using 1MDB money for personal gain, and said the allegations against him were political sabotage.

A special task force is currently investigating the allegations, and has so far remanded two directors of 1MDB-linked companies to assist with the investigations.

轉載請註明來源：今天頭條