Long live the Perovsky Court of Moscow!

We knew Basmanny, tried Meshchansky, visited Tverskoy, pounded on Khamovnichesky ... But we have not yet had such intellectual happiness. Last Wednesday, this court partially satisfied the claim of the veteran Semyonov against the journalist Podrabinek. The route of this case is known too well to describe it anew; council Shtukaturov - prefect Mitvol - comrade Dolgikh - journalist Podrabinek - Nashi movement - veteran Semyonov - judge Solovyova.

It was this wonderful Olga Vasilievna who brought joy to millions of Russians. For in her court decision, she ordered the journalist Podrabinek to refute one phrase from his article. One!

If, during the reading of the verdict, the judge had paused at this point and announced a bet on the rebuttal point, she would have hit a fat jackpot. Not a single dog - neither Soviet nor anti-Soviet! - I would not have guessed what it was that the unfortunate Podrabinek was destined to refute until the end of his days.

And there were options, what is there! In his short text, the former political prisoner had a good time to walk around the buffet. Members of the Council of Veterans, who got involved in their old age for tearing off signs on Leningradsky Prospekt, were covered in tar and feathers by Podrabinek - and in this form they let them roam the endless Internet space.

The journalist was even carried a little beyond the limits of Dahl's dictionary, because at the time of Dahl there was still no word "turn".

But Judge Solovyova did not consider either the "vertuhaevs" or the "executioners" subject to refutation, with which it remains to congratulate Comrade Dolgikh and his comrades-in-arms in the struggle against the historical process. Their belonging to the aforementioned definitions has now been established in a judicial proceeding. Nuremberg is still far away, but the first legal sketch for the future canvas seems to be available ... Low bow to United Russia Shtukaturov - in an evil administrative impulse, he did not even suspect what kind of cart he accidentally pushed down the slope!

Yes, but what, what was subject to refutation? As noted above, there is only one phrase: “Your homeland is not Russia, but the Soviet Union. Your country, thank God, is 18 years old.”

If I had stood in the courtroom in Podrabinek's place, I would have collapsed into a swoon. And having come out of a swoon, he would have blasphemed with a bad voice, calling for help from his comrades in karma, because you can’t figure it out with half a liter alone here ...

What to refute? That the homeland of the plaintiff Semyonov (like everyone who was born here after 1922) is the Soviet Union? That since 1991 this country is no more? Or that her disappearance is not thank God?

On the last point, you can really try to get a refutation, but, I'm afraid, not in court - and certainly not from Podrabinek.

He, scorched by the sun, will now wander, I suppose, to the cash desk and write out a thousand rubles to the offended Semyonov: an easy payment for the right to call a spade a spade. Podrabinek himself used to pay for such pleasure more seriously - with years of camps ...

By the way, the plaintiff Semyonov never appeared at the trial. It seems that in hindsight, he realized that the “Nashi” simply lied to him for PR of his own loud-mouthed organization.

I wonder how he will react to the official press release that his homeland is not the USSR?