Who said what to who.

When one is confronted by the smiling diplomat or politician, even the industrialist, we hear words
Words have meanings but sometimes the meanings are opaque and we are inevitably left with confusion and suspicion, not the platonic ideal of communication through language and discourse, a clarity of purpose, but a wonder at the brass necked subterfuge promulgated for our consumption leaving us even more in the dark than before.
"They" parade before us on our television screens, these poe-faced people (Donald Trump excluded) and tell us things which we are inclined to believe or disbelieve according to our persuasion. There is a truth in there somewhere, but who's truth ?

Listening just now to Sepp Blatter giving a press conference one is struck by the quandary we have of who to believe when no one saw the cookies taken. The press has bombarded us with claims of 'financial impropriety' (again a euphemism) without sight of the documents or the forensic proof.

He does what every crook does, he vehemently  deny's all knowledge of wrong doing and throws the "question" back, "prove it" !!!
The Americans were the ones to break the wall of Chinese Whispers that had beguiled the Europeans. It is suggested that they were peaked at loosing the World Cup to Qatar and with their distance from the Swiss Banking scene were able to ask and surmise where the Europeans were afraid of the consequences.
America is no shining example of exemplary legal practice in fact we are often horrified in the way they not only "pursue their man" but the medieval length of sentence they hand down.
Of course Congress makes the laws in light of what it thinks is the best for its electors and the legal fraternity, of whom America has more per head of population than anywhere else, do their best to find ways to circumvent them on behalf of their clients. But at least the Americans have pursued the financial shenanigans in the banks in a way that make the British and the Europeans look weak and ineffectual.
Words then are but tools to embellish a train of thought which might lead to a train of action. The 'political manifesto' or the 'conference agreement' are the work of the wordsmiths who pour over the text to provide sufficient opacity for "business as usual" and one has to wonder at the veracity of the system when the powerful beasts are casting around for prey.