@BillRM,
You are correct about the inequality of hiding the alleged victim's identity (though it has since leaked out). That restriction is a recent addition to our law designed to "protect" women. It doesn't apply to other crimes.
Wealthy politicians of any country are vulnerable to the political reaction to criminal prosecution of all kinds. In that aspect of things DSK is suffering the same loss of political stature as affected John Edwards. The French appear to be a bit more tolerant of crimes on the part of their political leaders - Jaques Chirac has evade prosecution for fraud and misuse of government funds for two decades now. However, this is not France.
BillRM wrote: Strangely when people point out that the tax code is allowing 2 percent of the population to collect 50 percents of the total wealth the same "news" outlets cry that we can not have class warfare.
I don't understand exactly what you mean here. However our government and tax code don't "allow" anyone to "collect" anything. Instead the government takes money as taxes from people who have earned it in various ways. A very large segment of our population pays no taxes at all. Indeed, through the 'earned income tax credit', many people get cash from the government instead of paying tax. For those who pay taxes, we have a very progressive tax code with marginal rates for high earners more than double that for the average taxpayer.
The loss of high paying jobs for folks with little education is more the result of prolongued slow economic growth in this country - growth that has not kept pace with the growth in our population. People disagree about the causes of this slow growth, but clearly the adverse effect on productivity of labor unions in the textile, steel and manufacturing industries - all of which are now largely gone - was a major factor, as well as the uncertainty associated with (usually inept and reactive) government regulation which has grown significantly in the last decade or so.
Taxing the rich on behalf of a wasteful government won't make anyone's situation better, but it might destroy the business that employs you.