The dust has yet to settle regarding the recent verdict on Marine Le Pen’s alleged “misappropriation of European Union (EU) funds” that rankled people on both the Right and the Left.
Le Pen’s Party, the Rassemblement National (RN), has lashed out at the unelected three-judge panel for making its decision based on political motives.
“Today this is no longer the government of judges, it is a tyranny of judges,” Bardella declared, in remarks cited by globalist outlet Politico.
For those of us concerned about the deteriorating state of French (and European) politics, the very fact that Le Pen has been effectively barred from running for office for five years (including her disqualification from the 2027 French presidential race), even during an appeal against the court decision, is disturbing to say the least.
Notably, Le Pen has not been the only EU politician to be slammed for allegedly misusing European funds.
As per Euronews:
“Each MEP is entitled to a monthly sum earmarked for paying their assistants, which amounts to €30,769 in the current legislature (2024-2029), a slight rise from the previous one. At least 40% of this allowance is for accredited assistants (APA), those working in the Parliament’s premises in Brussels, Luxembourg or Strasbourg and employed directly by the Parliament. The remaining 60% may be used for ‘local assistants’, employed either directly by the MEP or via a service provider, and working from the MEP’s constituency in their member state. Expenses related to APAs’ and local assistants’ work are defrayed only ‘for assistance which is necessary and directly linked to the exercise of a Member’s parliamentary mandate.’ This rule has frequently been broken in the past, and is still being breached, according to the sources. Since the boundaries between what constitutes work ‘necessary and directly linked’ to the role of MEP, and what does not, are not crystal clear, ‘local assistants’ often perform duties that are not strictly related to the MEP’s activity in the Parliament.”
Also, research conducted by KU Leuven (a Belgian university) revealed that parliamentary assistants do indeed perform tasks for political parties (in the Belgian context), as was in the case of Joëlle Milquet, the former leader of the Belgian centre-left CDH.
However, not every case of alleged financial misconduct in the European Parliament reaches the courts, according to Euronews.
Which is why the Paris court ruling on Le Pen is particularly alarming, given the huge political implications of the case (arguably more political than legal).
Where are the courts calling for “justice” to be served after leftist non-governmental organizations (NGOs) received millions of euros in state funding from leftist governments and the European Commission?
Well, no prizes for guessing why Le Pen was handed a draconian “political death” sentence when Bayrou was spared the legal guillotine eventually.
How about seeing through the investigation into Ursula von der Leyen’s “Pfizergate” scandal from start to finish? (In context, a court hearing regarding von der Leyen’s missing Pfizer text messages was postponed until December 6 last year, permitting the unelected EU leader to have a second shot at the European Commission’s top job.)
Why wasn’t Le Pen given “the benefit of the doubt”, as was in the case of the court ruling of French Prime Minister François Bayrou?
As Visegrád 24 stated:
“French Prime Minister François Bayrou is accused of the exact same form of embezzlement of EU funds that Marine Le Pen was just sentenced for. The allegations are that he and his centrist political party, the Democratic Movement (MoDem), misused European Parliament funds by employing individuals in fictitious jobs as parliamentary assistants. The accusations suggest that between 2005 and 2017, these assistants were paid with EU money intended for work supporting Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), but instead, they primarily performed tasks for MoDem in France, unrelated to their official roles. The investigation began in 2017, shortly after Bayrou was appointed France’s Justice Minister by Macron. French authorities looked into whether MoDem, under Bayrou’s leadership, had systematically employed staff using EU funds—estimated initially at €1.4 million—for party work rather than legitimate parliamentary duties. Bayrou faced charges of “complicity in the embezzlement of public funds” in 2019, reflecting his role as MoDem’s president and alleged orchestrator of the scheme. The case led to his resignation as Justice Minister just a month into Macron’s presidency. In February 2024, a Paris court acquitted Bayrou, citing insufficient evidence that he personally authorized or knew of the fraudulent practices, giving him ‘the benefit of the doubt.’”
Well, no prizes for guessing why Le Pen was handed a draconian “political death” sentence when Bayrou was spared the legal guillotine eventually.
In the eyes of France’s elites (and the Brussels brahmins), Le Pen is simply too “far right” and populist to be considered politically palatable.
Le Pen’s main unforgivable crime (as per her leftist opponents) is that she is passionately nationalistic and virulently against widespread immigration and the globalist regime (at least in the public sphere).
And for these reasons, Le Pen has to be eliminated from the 2027 race to the Élysée, if not by electoral means, then by broadly interpreted legal mechanisms by a leftist cabal of judges.
