In my article The Court is Mightier than Le Pen three days ago, I commented on the news-worthy verdict in France. Among other things, I wrote that: “I’m sure Donald Trump will have something to say about this case too: after all, he sees himself (with somewhat greater justification) as a victim of a legal witch-hunt too.”
The Donald didn’t disappoint. Yesterday he wrote, with his usual illiterate flair: “In The Witch Hunt against Marine Le Pen is another example of European Leftists using Lawfare to silence Free Speech, and censor their Political Opponent, this time going so far as to put that Opponent in prison.”
Trump ended by issuing a peremptory demand: FREE MARINE LE PEN! Such deliverance seems unnecessary, considering that she isn’t in prison and nor is she ever likely to receive a custodial sentence harsher than house arrest. But hey, it’s the feeling that counts.
Talking to reporters later, Trump reminded them that he had a personal dog in that fight: “That’s a big deal. That’s a very big deal… That sounds like this country. That sounds very much like this country.”
Two parenthetic remarks are in order on the form of Trump’s self-expression. I wonder if his tendency to capitalise all nouns is a tribute he pays to his German father. Considering the way Trump uses English, I doubt he can speak any foreign language, but I suppose obsessively illiterate capitalisation is the least he can do for his verstorbener Vater.
The other observation is more serious, and I must run it by my two psychiatrist friends. Trump has a worrying tendency to repeat the same words or phrases several times within a few seconds. Called ‘perseveration’ in psychiatry, this is usually caused by a brain injury or some other organic disorder.
Trump perseverates all the time: for example, he told Zelensky several times in rapid succession: “You aren’t holding any cards.” Not being professionally qualified, I don’t wish to indulge in homespun diagnostics. I just hope the US isn’t cursed with two consecutive presidents who aren’t quite compos mentis.
Trump’s kindred souls echoed his sentiment. JD Vance identified Le Pen’s offence as “very minor” and opined that barring her from holding elective office was “not democracy”. Vlad Putin agreed, mentioning the “violation of democratic norms” that are so dear to his heart.
But the most telling statement came from Georgia Meloni, Italian prime minister. I’d suggest that her surname is a perfect aptronym, but won’t, for fear of being branded a male chauvinist or, perish the thought, gender stereotyper.
Unlike more perfidious politicians, Miss Meloni didn’t even try to couch her thoughts in rhetorical subterfuge.
Speaking from the heart, she too expressed concerns about France’s democratic deficit: “I don’t know the merits of the accusations against Marine Le Pen, or the reasons for such a strong decision. But I think that no one who cares about democracy can rejoice at a sentence that targets the leader of a major party and deprives millions of citizens of representation.”
Like all ‘populist’ politicians, Miss Meloni doesn’t always take the trouble to think before talking. If she did, she’d realise how cosmically awful her statement is.
Allow me to paraphrase. Miss Meloni neither knows nor cares whether Le Pen is guilty or innocent. All that matters to her is that a fellow ‘populist’ has been suspended from politics, which is a blow to democracy whatever “the merits of the accusations”.
What if such a politician were guilty of murder, Georgia? Still a blow to democracy? The underlying assumption is that, simply because he is a ‘populist’, no ‘populist’ can possibly be guilty of any crime. And even if he is guilty, he still should be issued a blanket pardon covering all misdeeds past or future. Have I got it right, Georgia? Donald? Vlad? JD?
The amazing thing about this brouhaha is that none of Le Pen’s defenders, and not even Marine herself, has said she is innocent. No one seems to care about such incidentals, and yet they are the only thing that ought to matter in a country ruled by law.
And the rule of law is one of the few remaining vestiges of our civilisation, one of the very few things that still keep us from descending into out-and-out barbarism. Apparently, some of the West’s political leaders have made that descent already, and they luxuriate in the putrid swamp at the bottom.
A voice of sanity came from the French journalist Anne-Elisabeth Moutet, who occasionally graces our conservative papers with her perceptive comments on the French scene.
Marine Le Pen shouldn’t bother to appeal her conviction, writes Mlle Moutet: “Nobody has any doubt that if she tries to appeal the ban, she will be found guilty again. Le Pen has no chance at appeal. She’s guilty as hell and all her people are guilty as hell… It was an obvious fraud.”
There you have it in a nutshell. Marine Le Pen isn’t a martyr for democracy but a fraudster. The Gaullists Chirac, Sarkozy, both former presidents, and Fillon, former PM, also had their collars felt, and Mélenchon, the Trotskyist leader, is currently under investigation for similar offences. Dura lex, sed lex, as the Romans used to say.
French prosecutors deny that the decision to prosecute Marine Le Pen had a political component. That too ignores the salient legal point, one way or the other.
A man found guilty of murder can’t get off by pointing out that someone else got away with the same crime. Murder is murder, and fraud is fraud. If those prosecutors went after Le Pen for political reasons, they are reprehensible. But that doesn’t make the crime of which she has been convicted any less criminal.
All her champions ought to remind themselves of the rule of law and the vital role it plays in Western polity. It’s not all about ‘populist’ sloganeering.
Speaking of which, has anyone noticed that the slogan Make America Great Again screams insecurity and defensiveness? The word ‘again’ implies that America isn’t great any longer, and I emphatically disagree. She is Great, but I Doubt She’ll Remain Great for Much Longer with that Lot in Charge.
In the UK, even convicted IRA terrorists were permitted to stand for Parliament while serving their prison sentences, and some of them were elected. In France, the convicted perpetrator of lesser crimes is barred from standing for any office. I prefer the traditional principles of the English Common Law to the arbitrary rules of the Napoleonic Code. Were the judges who convicted and sentenced Mme le Pen politically motivated? I don’t know; but under English Common Law the question would be of much less significance.
Actually, Le Pen is allowed to keep her parliamentary seat. But I absolutely agree with you on the subject of the English Common Law vs. the Napoleonic Code. If I disagreed, I’d be living in France. Anyway, England is defined by her laws much more than France is by hers. One thing I like about the French law is that, when they have jury trial, which they only do in serious cases, at least two of the jurors must be legally trained. Traditionally, it would have been a rotten idea in England, but these days two many potential jurors have no concept of guilt and innocence. Some lawyers still do, and it may be helpful for them to keep reminding the panel that, say, a tough childhood isn’t an exculpating factor.