French Police Tries to Raid Elysée Palace in Corruption Probe…
Some updates:
President Emmanuel Macron of France offered his support to President Pedro Sánchez of Spain, after President Trump threatened to inflict economic pain on Spain for refusing to allow American fighter planes to use the country’s airbases to attack Iran.
The European Union has held off on designating the IRGC a terror group, while Australia and Canada have followed the US’s lead. The Europeans have been divided, with Italy lobbying for the designation and France resisting
A new French corruption scandal erupted today (14) as financial and anti-corruption police raided services linked to the Élysée Palace as part of an investigation opened in October 2025.
French police were denied access to Emmanuel Macron’s official residence as part of a corruption investigation into the organization of state ceremonies posthumously honoring citizens https://t.co/SAgPSpeIBs
The probe is looking into allegations of favoritism, conflict of interest, corruption, and influence peddling when awarding public contracts for organizing prestigious Panthéon ceremonies by the Centre des Monuments Nationaux (Center of National Monuments).
French cops are focusing on Shortcut Events, which monopolized the organization of all such €2 million ceremonies from 2002 to 2024.
Investigators want to know if the contracts awarded to the same firm involved improper support from the Élysée, Ministry of Culture, or related bodies, bypassing normal procurement rules.
But the French police found the doors of the Presidential Palace closed to them.
“The French presidency refused to let investigators enter the Elysée Palace on Tuesday as part of a probe into contracts linked to memorial ceremonies, invoking the immunity enjoyed by French President Emmanuel Macron.
The investigators that presented themselves at the Elysée Palace weren’t granted entry, according to a French presidency official who was granted anonymity for protocol reasons.
‘Investigators were told that the documents pertaining to Élysée Palace staff, which are unrelated to the President’s official duties and can therefore be disclosed, would be provided to them upon request’, an Elysée official said.”
Macron kept the police out of the Elysée Palace
National Financial Prosecutor Pascal Prache said that the failed raid was part of a probe on contracts for the organization of memorial ceremonies.
“French presidency staff told investigators they couldn’t search the Elysée Palace because the premises are covered by presidential immunity, the statement said.”
Meanwhile, Macron schmoozes with African despots, like this guy who runs the largest slave nation:
Heureux d’accueillir en visite d’État mon ami le Président Mohamed Ould Cheikh El Ghazouani.
Face à la destabilisation du monde et aux défis communs, la Mauritanie et la France sont deux partenaires de confiance.… pic.twitter.com/XEgqRt1Jot
When Protest Becomes Intimidation: The Far Left’s Blind Spot on Violence
There is a strain within modern left wing politics that refuses to confront an uncomfortable truth. While it speaks the language of compassion and justice, it too often minimises, excuses or rationalises disorder when it serves a political end. That is not a fringe problem. It is a cultural one. The recent death of a conservative activist at the hands of the so called progressives in France, is just another example.
In recent years Britain and France alike have seen demonstrations tip into vandalism, arson, assaults on police even spray painting planes at Stansted as well as army bases, and the intimidation of political opponents. The official line is almost always the same. Anger is understandable. Emotions are running high. The system has failed people. These phrases may explain frustration, but they do not excuse violence. Yet the rhetorical softening persists.
.
One of the most troubling tendencies is the moral relativism applied to public order. When a protest is aligned with so called progressive causes, damage is described as symbolic, disruption as necessary, and confrontation as the inevitable consequence of injustice. Through the courts it is excused, and supporters claim moral justice. When similar tactics are deployed by ideological opponents, the language changes immediately. Then it is extremism. Then it is thuggery. That double standard corrodes public trust.
.
Another warning sign is the casual dehumanisation of political rivals. Branding opponents as fascists, racists, reactionaries or enemies of progress may feel satisfying in the moment, but it strips away the assumption of good faith that underpins democratic life. Once people are cast as morally illegitimate, the ground shifts. Silencing them appears virtuous. Shutting down their meetings seems justified. Harassment or yet more violence begins to look like acceptable activism.
.
There is also a persistent myth that left wing causes are inherently peaceful because they claim the mantle of equality. History offers no such guarantee. Ideology does not immunise movements from excess. The belief that one’s objectives are morally superior can make transgression feel righteous. That is precisely how boundaries erode. That is exactly the division of those suggesting they are against, but blindless to reality causes this ideology not to see.
None of this is to suggest that everyone on the left endorses violence. The problem lies in the reluctance to confront it when it emerges from within. Instead of unequivocal condemnation, there is often qualification. Instead of clarity, there is deflection towards grievances. That instinctive defensiveness sends a message. It tells the more radical elements that they will not be fully ostracised. When it is not then prosecuted by laws it shows a policing and legal problem of indoctrination.
A democratic society depends on a simple principle. Political change must be pursued through persuasion and lawful process, not intimidation. The moment any movement begins to blur that line, it endangers the very freedoms it claims to defend, we see this all too often on the left, even using those described as useful idiots to help canvass and spread hate at elections, under the matra of things like ‘hope not hate’, but that is just it, that is the exact division and lack of understanding or empathy and respect to others points of views.
The leaflets handed out talk of outrageous slander of a political opposite that through history has led to the most productive and effective living standard increases in human history. And yet the so called ‘useful idiots’, brand around nasty rhetoric as if they have the integrity of knowledge and have checked every opposing activist by way of examination to prove their own mantra of hate is fair and justified.
Criticism of the left is not an attack on democracy. It is part of it. But honest criticism requires the courage to say this plainly. Disorder is not activism. Intimidation is not justice. Slander is not fact. And no political tradition should assume it stands above the standards it demands of others. It should not command respect and most certainly should not command the encouragement or support of the establishment.
