The defendants’ tweets compared [Brigitte] Macron to an “old tranny” and “a first lady boy” “who wears size 47 shoes.” Jérôme A., for his part, wrote: “An ultra minority of weirdos have taken power in Paris. Who doubts Brigitte’s cock?”
“I’m accused of nine tweets spaced over four months,” he pointed out, as if surprised to find himself in court for so little. Why, in the flood of vulgar, insulting comments on the internet, did the law take an interest in him? “I wonder what I’m doing here,” he complained. “Today, you can send people to police custody for a few harmless tweets, end up in cells that smell of piss, be summoned for several days in Paris. It’s frightening.”
Vanity Fair shows close to no concern about censorship and government abuse of power. Notice the language: "as if surprised to find himself in court for so little," "he complained."
The author, Hugo Wintrebert, appears to be French. But France has a brilliant tradition of satirizing government officials that goes back to the Middle Ages, and there's plenty of sexual imagery to be found.
पोस्ट्स
५४ टिप्पण्या:
Je suis Charlie? Non!
If Trump's government was like Macron; the left wouldn't be crying about Kimmel being pulled off air for a couple of days. Rather, the "anonymous friends" of Cheryl Hines would be known to us, and they would be facing prison sentences for harassing her over her marriage to RFK Jr., who works for Trump.
If Macron was like Biden; then these few internet trolls would have been labeled domestic terrorists followed by subpoenas to track their mobile phones, banking records, and all other forms of communication. Once their nearest associates were identified; those people would also be labeled domestic terrorists and their information tracked. At some point, they could expect an early morning FBI raid of their premises and hauled into court on some unrelated charges hyped up until they plead guilty to some form of felony trespassing.
If Arctic Frost is not actually going to be punished by DC courts, then President Trump should absolutely use the same tactics on the left. Let Obama's staff consider the consequences from inside a cell. As for the Macrons, that old tranny isn't fooling anyone, no matter how many of "her" children lie under oath.
One simple saliva swab answers the question definitively and factually. Then the Court studies the appropriate statutes and decides. Napoleonic Code law functions quite differently from what we have in Common Law jurisdictions.
Simplistically, Napoleonic law presumes GUILT, not innocence, and you must prove innocence of the charges. I lived in a Napoleonic jurisdiction for 20 years, and you do not even have the right to consult with your attorney in Court.
Little wonder that former French colonies are amongst the world's most dysfunctional shit-holes.
The terrorists are let go the citizens are caged
What if the insults were directed at MR. Macron? If the tweeters implied that he was like a woman, are they suggesting that he is weak or inferior or somehow less capable? Why reinforce the idea that women are the weaker sex by being hysteric? I think the same standard should be applied to the tweets questioning Mrs. Macron gender. So what if the tweeters think Mrs. Macron's lack of femininity means she's actually a man in drag. What's wrong with that?
"Brigitte's" got a mean right hook!
Vanity Fair shows close to no concern about censorship and government abuse of power.
As indeed they shouldn't, as a journalistic enterprise! Je suis Charlie!
Oh wait, that's not what Althouse meant...
Let's face it only right wingers in the USA and most independents still believe in the concept of Free Speech. Europe never really did. And the Left here has completely abandoned support for Free Speech or honest journalism as Obama made crystal clear over the last weekend.
Vanity Fair is a shitty tranny(D)
No concern for censorship - HOW NBC can you get.
Seems there could be civil defamation issues with these tweets, but criminal is ridiculous.
Another click of the ratchet, as far as European Free Speech goes, and this is the place with a history of chopping off the heads of their leaders. Of all the people that should have a thick skin when it comes to public criticism over appearances. Ms. Macron should have thought more carefully over what she signed up for, when robbing the cradle. The pursuit of power makes for strange bedfellows.......
For all of those arguing for freedom of speech and expression, I say 6 7!
From what I've read Marie Antoinette was a somewhat frivolous woman who spent a lot of money on clothes and various vanities. She was not, however, a raging nymphomaniac who found it difficult to restrain her libido for longer than an hour. There was an underground press in Paris,, and her wanton sexuality was the subject of many pornographic novels and articles. It had an effect. Most of the Jacobins came to believe in the truth of such assertions. At her trial, the prosecutor accused her of seducing her five year old son.......Perhaps the cure is worse than the disease, but too much is too much. I guess public figures sign up for some abuse, but their wives and children should be spared.
"Vanity Fair shows close to no concern about censorship and government abuse of power" Correct. And why should they? Progs like censorship and government (ab)use of power, on the assumption that it will rarely be used against them and they will wield power over others. Free speech only became a prog issue, temporarily, when government "abuse" was aimed at leftists a century ago.
"But France has a brilliant tradition of satirizing government officials" But it has an even stronger tradition of centralizing government power and suppressing dangerous opposition, now carried out by the judiciary. (Caveat about the case: not saying insults to Mrs. Macron count as satire or opposition.)
They are ridiculous dhimmis but not because shes a man its because they are credentialed progs
’Another click of the ratchet…’
Is it just me, or is the water in this pot getting warmer?
First Lady Boy is hilarious.
Trump is a public figure. There is no doubt that he is a crass and venal man. For all that, though, he is not a rampant sex fiend who haunts the dressing rooms of upscale department stores looking for women to rape. Many Democrats accept that as an established fact though. Settled science. I think this is due in part to all the late night jokes that are made about him (and, okay, to his own crass remarks). I don't know how to strike the proper balance, but there is a fulcrum point where criticism becomes unfair and should become actionable.
With regard to the actual insults Brigitte Macron could've taken the wind out of their sails by leaning into them, with lots of eyebrow waggling and meaningful moues.
Yes but they are supremely entitled so they wouldnt lower themselves
Pre-revolutionary France did not have freedom of the press. They did, however, have a huge underground press. There were numerous articles and pornographic novels that detailed the raging nymphomania of Marie Antoinette. Marie Antoinette was a vain and frivolous woman, but she did not have an extravagant sex life. Nonetheless, that was the opinions held about her by the French mob. At her trial, she was accused of seducing her five year old son......Perhaps the cure is worse than the disease, but too much is too much.
I see that France just sentenced former president Sarkozy to 5 years in prison. When I read that, I checked it out, and it turned out that they had no actual proof that Sarkozy actually took any money, per ChatGPT: Although the court did not conclusively determine that the money actually arrived in his campaign accounts, it held that the very act of orchestrating a “corruption pact” to obtain funding from a foreign regime constituted the crime of criminal conspiracy under French law.
So they are imprisoning a former president while his appeal is underway, just to make sure that he is made an example of, even if he beats the rap.
So naturally, I got curious and asked Chat what Sarkozy's position on Ukraine was, and of course it was exactly as I guessed, he was against sending the French army into Ukraine and supported negotiating with Russia.
But nobody calls Macron "Authoritarian." This is because one of the prime rules of propaganda is to accuse the other side of whatever it is that you are doing that the normies won't like, so if you are using the color of the law to punish and imprison your political opponents, the way Joe Biden did, or Macron is doing, well, the way actual authoritarians do, well the rule book of propaganda says that you accuse the other side of it.
Just like if you are going to act thuggishly and foment violent coups in foreign countries, you accuse your enemy of being a "thug."
The rule here is total silence."
We make no pretense of rehabilitation here. We're not priests, we're processors. A meatpacker processes live animals into edible ones. We process dangerous men into harmless ones.
This we accomplish by breaking you. Breaking you physically, spiritually, and here [points to head]. Strange things happen to the head here. Put all hope out of your mind...and masturbate as little as possible. lt drains the strength.
That's all, take him away.
Actually he took money from qaddafi through an algerian arms dealer then went to war against qaddafi
Gemini AI Says:
Voltaire's writings and public statements would likely put him at significant risk of prosecution under modern French speech restriction laws, particularly those concerning hate speech, defamation, and potentially the justification of terrorism.
While modern France, inspired partly by Enlightenment ideals like Voltaire's, has robust protections for freedom of expression, it also has specific, legally enforced limitations, particularly when compared to countries like the United States.
Key issues that would likely lead to prosecution include:
Criticism of Religion: Voltaire was a fierce critic of all organized religions, particularly the Catholic Church, using biting satire and polemics. While France has abolished blasphemy laws (except in the Alsace-Moselle region), it is illegal to defame or insult individuals or groups based on their religious affiliation, ethnicity, race, etc.. Many of Voltaire's more sweeping and harsh critiques of the "infâme" (referring to religious superstition and intolerance) could be interpreted as inciting hatred or collective defamation against religious groups, which is a criminal offense.
Defamation and Insult: Voltaire frequently targeted specific individuals in power, from the French regent to various philosophers and church officials, often with highly personal and satirical insults (e.g., accusing the regent of incest). Modern French law has strict anti-defamation and anti-insult laws that protect individuals and public officials, and these laws are frequently applied.
Sedition/Incitement of Disorder: Although Voltaire advocated for a constitutional monarchy rather than revolution, his works were considered highly disruptive and dangerous by the 18th-century French monarchy because they challenged authority and encouraged critical thinking among the populace. In modern France, speech that advocates or justifies terrorism is strictly prohibited, and individuals have been prosecuted for online posts deemed to support terrorist acts or otherwise disrupt public order. Some of Voltaire's more radical anti-authoritarian statements might be seen as falling foul of modern interpretations of laws against incitement, depending on the context and public climate.
In an era where POTUS can implement emergency tariffs against a country for a commercial, I'd say Vanity Fair's attitude kind of follows the mood du jour.
The parallels between Sarkozy and Trump are striking. Both are Republicans. Both were arrested and charged with felonies. Sarkozy was alleged to have conspired with Libya to interfere in the French election in 2007. Trump was alleged to have conspired with Russia to interfere in the American election of 2016. Sarkozy was prosecuted 14 years after the fact. Trump was indicted 7 years after the election. Left-wing France convicted Sarkozy. Right-wing USA smelled a rat, and put Trump back into office, which was a big fuck you to the illegal attempt to subvert democracy by the left.
See also the Arctic Frost scandal, where our federal Stasi, the FBI, had investigations into multiple Republicans. Anybody who supported Trump was targeted.
The left is hostile to free speech, democracy, and popular sovereignty. They favor a massive state apparatus, with unelected rulers dictating speech codes, and bureaucrats issuing edicts. And they will not allow anybody to mock the government or speak out against it.
Right now there is a fight in the Democrat party, about whether the party will continue to believe in liberal society and human rights. Or whether the party will go full socialist, European style. And the liberals here in the USA are losing that fight.
Everybody in this story is a total asshole.
From Vanity Fair to the Macrons to the internet trolls, it's a bunch of assholes, all practicing their craft upon one another.
Article is paywalled - what was the sentence?
Another rule is that if you are going to foment coups on the borders of nations you have declared to be an enemy, and then send those nations weapons, such as the medium range missiles aimed at China that we are putting in the Philippines after re-installing the corrupt Marcos clan, well then you have to call your target "paranoid."
It's foreign policy and propaganda that only psychopaths could come up with.
Homosexual or simulant? Transsocial? Diverse blocs want to know.
I was told that Candace Owens was a crazy conspiracy theorist though.
Updating my first comment:
“Je suis Charlie Hebdo!”
“Nein, das ist nicht erlaubt.”
Bob Boyd +1
Bob Boyd 9:20 - well said.
A Diverse assembly of back... black holes... whores h/t NAACP at the intersection of racism and sexism for Variety.
France is a tourist destination; nothing more. When the Jihadists take it over, then, not even that.
However, evidence seems to indicate "Brigitte" really has a missing decade in her life.
A democrat fever dream.
Besides the beheadings and blood, the French Revolution was accompanied with all kinds of scurrilous anecdotes about Marie Antoinette. British and American journalists, pamphleteers and cartoonists edged into the same rumormongering and scandalmongering in those days. The internet has brought all that back.
On my way back from Paris. It is a lot different than when I last visited in 1999.
Clearly the Europeans need immigrants for their lower level service jobs. However, that was the case way back then.
The major change is the huge volume of tourists and the standardizations of menus catering to tourists. It was disappointing.
Except many of these newcomers are on the dole
Truth is always a defense, right?
Actually not in the uk
Apparently, two others were tried in September 2024 for defaming Brigitte Macron by claiming she was a trans-woman named Jean-Michel Trogneux. They were convicted and fined, but in July an appeals court threw out the case, saying it does not fit the definition of defamation. Macron has appealed.
Seems like maybe Macron should have waited to see the outcome of that appeal before filing the same case a second time (or third, I can't tell if Candace Owens has actually been charged or just threatened with charges).
“The defendants [tweets said Brigitte Macron] wears size 47 shoes.” A Euro size 47 is a men’s size 13.5 and women’s 15.5. Brigitte is about 5’4” - 5’5”. A man that height would typically wear a men’s size 9.5, although there is a lot of variation.
Marie Antoinette endured far worse, and as far as I know, none of those salacious pamphleteers were prosecuted. Gendarmes often confiscated such material, causing economic losses to printers and booksellers, but no one was thrown in the Bastille for "bullying the Queen of France".
Bullying became a mortal sin around 20 years ago as ostensibly well-meaning writers and filmmakers, overwhelmingly female and feminist, churred out dozens if not hundreds of books, films, and articles decrying the almost universal tendency of children to tease and torment those they see as outsiders -- the newcomer, the intellectually inclined, the less stylishly attired, the physically awkward or unattractive. A laudable effort? One would be inclined to agree. However, the anti-bullying crusaders were not content to criticize the bullies. They wanted punishment inflicted on the miscreants, and ideological conformity from everyone -- in other words, a new understanding of speech as violence with the unspoken corollary, violence is speech. And so, here we are: Charlie Kirk is murdered, and some uncouth French satirists are facing imprisonment for disrespecting the Nomenklatura.
If you're wondering how the French communists have greeted this development, given the long history of Jean-Paul Sartre's scatological abuse of the Gaullists, be assured they have fully complied with the Inga Principle: It's only bad when THEY do it.
Clearly, teenagers goading other teens into commiting suicide is cyberbulling, but can we really use that phrase in reference to politicians (or their wives)? Isn't the general assumption that political actors have thick skins, even if all public figures may not?
When the media doesn't criticize politicians when they deserve it the country suffers. When politicians go after gadflies and critics with all the force of the state, the same is true.
Regarding Marie Antoinette: When the deposed queen was brought before the Revolutionary Tribunal in 1793, those same pamphlets and broadsheets that defamed her as a whore and pervert, were presented as evidence that she was indeed a whore and a pervert. Not one of the five presiding judges questioned the prosecution's evidence.
The French can be absolute shits sometimes.
Basically, your Marie Antoinette story provides a solid reason for Mrs Macron to contest these things vigorously.
It's like when the "on native land" was put into the Canadian National Anthem, in the World Series, and next day some Mohawk Indians floated a barge ashore on the St Lawrence and started "squatting" or "kicking off squatters" depending on how seriously you take this stuff.
And this: https://vancouversun.com/news/vaughn-palmer-aboriginal-title-richmond-cowichan-decision
Macron is at 11% approval, BTW.
Can he go lower? Yes he can
While modern France, inspired partly by Enlightenment ideals like Voltaire's, has robust protections for freedom of expression, it also has specific, legally enforced limitations, particularly when compared to countries like the United States.
Only lefty-marinated AI, or our own Chuck/Serial Killer, could include the word "robust" in that sentence without irony.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.