Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Thomas Massie Won’t Back Down

A primary loss to the Israel Lobby seems to have only emboldened the Kentucky congressman

By Jack Hunter | The American Conservative | June 6, 2026

Thomas Massie isn’t acting like a defeated man.

After losing the most expensive primary race in American history last month, largely thanks to pro-Israel figures and groups spending millions to defeat him (according to the Federal Election Commission, Massie received donations from 1,119 individuals actually living in Kentucky, compared to only 98 for his opponent Ed Gallrein), Massie announced just days later, “I filed with FEC for the 2028 House race.”

He explained, “This allows me to raise funds to continue my political operations supporting my position as a current office holder and as a potential candidate for federal office.”

A run for the White House isn’t out of the question. “I haven’t made a final decision about which office to seek, if I run,” Massie teased.

As one of the most antiwar congressional Republicans in history this side of Ron Paul, Massie has offered consistent and vocal opposition to foreign aid including to Israel. His opposition to U.S. backing and participation in Israel’s wars in Gaza and Iran was seen as a significant factor in why he lost his primary, angering President Donald Trump and, of course, one of the country’s most powerful foreign lobbying groups.

Rather than backing down, Massie is calling these people out more than ever.

On Sunday, after the head of the Republican Jewish Coalition boasted of the $5 million his group had spent to unseat Massie, the Kentucky congressman replied, “Matt Brooks bragging that the Republican Jewish Coalition spent millions to buy a congressional seat in Kentucky… but if you observe the same thing, you’re antisemitic.”

Massie was noting that any opposition to—or mere acknowledgement of—Israel’s outsized influence in American politics is almost always labeled as antisemitism by pro-Israel advocates. Yet here was Brooks openly touting it. Neoconservative veteran John Podhoretz even celebrated the role of “Jewish money” in defeating Massie.

When Axios reported this week that Trump had reportedly unloaded on Netanyahu in an expletive-laden call, Massie weighed in with his own reality check, writing,

It’s all talk. Just withhold foreign aid to Israel for a month and they’ll stop bombing their neighbors—instant peace, the Strait of Hormuz can be opened, and gas drops $2 a gallon. Israel has been, and continues to be, the biggest welfare recipient from American tax payers.

The libertarian-leaning Kentuckian added on Tuesday, “The more Netanyahu prevents the war with Iran from ending, the more obvious it becomes that he convinced Trump to start it.”

Massie isn’t the only prominent conservative who has stuck his neck out by vocally opposing the Iran War. The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh launched a tirade against it this week, writing on Monday, “This whole sh—show has been an enormous waste of time and resources and our country has not benefited from it at all.”

Of course, the Daily Wire is home to Ben Shapiro, one of the most pro-Israel voices on the American right. Replying to Walsh, Massie chimed in, “I hope you get to keep your job after this post.”

When talk host and rabid Zionist Mark Levin insisted on Sunday, “I make NO apologies for my support of Israel, the Persian people, Ukraine, and Taiwan! Period!”, America First Massie had this response: “Great! Write a personal check. Americans are tired of sending them tax dollars while our own infrastructure crumbles and prices soar.”

This kind of banter with neocons is nothing new for Massie, but there does seem to be something extra in his standard fearlessness now, including with regard to his efforts to declassify the controversial files of the late disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, files which the administration would strongly prefer to bury. The president, under intense pressure, signed off on their release in November.

After the podcaster and former Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked podcaster Shawn Ryan what “core MAGA” was now, Ryan replied, “I have no idea. Pedophiles Supporting Israeli Lobby?”

Massie shared that clip, asking “What’s MAGA now?”

He’s not just striking a new pose online. After Responsible Statecraft last Friday revealed a shocking plan to integrate the U.S. and Israeli militaries, Massie and his frequent Democratic ally Rep. Ro Khanna of California pounced. Massie posted, “If the provision in the NDAA to integrate/synchronize the U.S. and Israeli militaries (section 224) makes it out of committee, I’ll offer an amendment to strip it from the bill on the floor.”

“We are a sovereign country,” Massie insisted.

Khanna shared Massie’s post, writing, “And I will be offering an amendment in the committee itself to strip section 224 out.” The California congressman added, “Trump can’t kill the Massie/Khanna partnership no matter how much he posts on Truth Social.”

Two weeks since a Trump-endorsed and AIPAC-backed candidate defeated Massie, the president still seems obsessed with him—and with former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), Tucker Carlson, and other America Firsters—something that could get even more interesting given that Massie still has seven more months in office. Greene was pressured out of her Georgia House seat by the president, but in retirement has remained a force in politics, arguably even a greater one than she was in office.

Massie, for his part, is using his remaining time in Congress to advance an America First agenda. He even introduced legislation to block U.S. bombs from being sent to Israel. “Israel has used American-supplied munitions to kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians,” Massie observed. “America is morally obligated to end support of Israel’s devastation of Gaza and its people. I’m cosponsoring the Block the Bombs Act to limit the transfer of offensive weapons to Israel.”

As if that wasn’t enough, on Wednesday Massie again broke party ranks, along with three other Republicans, by joining Democrats to pass the Iran War Powers Resolution, which he cosponsored. “The People’s House is sending a message: end this war,” he wrote.

The hits keep coming. On Thursday, Massie announced that he will address a controversial attack by Israeli forces on an American ship on the event’s 59th anniversary. Massie wrote, “On June 8, 2026, I’ll speak on the floor of the House to honor and memorialize the brave crew of the USS Liberty who died and were wounded in an unprovoked attack by  Israel on June 8, 1967.”

He’s obviously not cowering or giving an inch to the figures and groups that worked so hard and spent so much to beat him.

Megyn Kelly has reported that an estimated $30 million was spent by pro-Israel forces to defeat Massie. What dollar amount would that lobby be willing to cough up should Massie decide to run for president?

Again, Thomas Massie doesn’t look or talk like someone who just lost. He acts more like someone who’s just getting started.

He just might be.

June 7, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Thomas Massie Won’t Back Down

Armenia arrests six opposition candidates on the eve of key elections

RT | June 7, 2026

Armenian authorities have detained six parliamentary candidates from the opposition Strong Armenia bloc a day before the country heads to the polls in Sunday’s general election.

During recent televised debates, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who came to power in 2018 following street protests dubbed the “Velvet Revolution,” called for the revocation of the registration of several major opposition groups.

The Central Election Commission refused to remove Strong Armenia from Sunday’s ballot altogether, but approved requests for criminal proceedings and the pre-trial detention of six candidates: Hayk Avagyan, Susan Badalyan, Artur Abrahamyan, Vahe Tavakalyan, Vahe Yeghiazaryan, and Ashot Sahakyan.

“In the course of the preliminary investigation into a criminal case concerning the material inducement of numerous individuals and the laundering of funds on an especially large scale, public criminal prosecution has been initiated against six parliamentary candidates from the Strong Armenia bloc,” the Investigative Committee said in a statement on Saturday, adding that all six were placed under arrest.

Opposition forces accused the authorities of exerting immense pressure ahead of the vote, in which Pashinyan’s ruling Civil Contract party – which has been pushing for closer integration with the EU while maintaining traditionally close relations with Russia – is expected to remain the largest single force in parliament, but could fall short of forming a one-party majority government.

Pashinyan’s leadership is being contested by a heavily fractured opposition of 17 parties and political blocs. The Strong Armenia bloc, led by Russian-Armenian businessman Samvel Karapetyan, is polling second, although figures vary widely depending on the pollster, how many parties cross the 4% threshold, and how the roughly 30% of undecided voters split. Should Civil Contract fail to secure a majority of seats, coalition talks among its rivals are not guaranteed to succeed.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova accused Armenian authorities of undermining democratic procedures, warning that such behavior casts doubt on the legitimacy of the election. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev similarly accused Pashinyan of “trying to knock out all his rivals in the elections.”

Moscow warned that closer integration with the EU would make Armenia’s continued membership in the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) impossible due to incompatible standards. Russian President Vladimir Putin warned in May that the South Caucasus nation could lose up to 14% of its GDP if it leaves the economic organization.

Earlier this month, former President Robert Kocharyan warned that Pashinyan’s government was “artificially” turning Armenia into an enemy of Russia and leading the country down the same path as Ukraine.

June 6, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Comments Off on Armenia arrests six opposition candidates on the eve of key elections

Gitmo and Torture Revisited

By Andrew P. Napolitano | Ron Paul Institute | June 4, 2026

America’s longest current criminal prosecution is in its 15th year, on its fifth judge, and still has no trial date.

The defendants are Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four alleged mass murder co-conspirators. Mohammed is the second person that the government has characterized as the ringleader of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. Originally, the feds had labeled Osama bin Laden as the ringleader. Yet, rather than charging and arresting bin Laden, in order to keep him quiet it sent a team of Navy Seals to his home in Pakistan to murder him and his wife and their children.

After that, the feds labeled Mohammed as the orchestrator of 9/11 even though that, by the time of bin Laden’s death, Mohammed had been in US custody for eight years. During that time, he was brutally tortured by CIA officers and other US civilian agents.

His torture was truly repellant. He was waterboarded 183 times. He was hanged by his wrists while naked and in well-lit walk-in refrigerators such that he was freezing and denied sleep for days. His head was smashed repeatedly against wooden walls. His rectum, through which he was fed, was so brutalized that he bled for months, often ingesting into his intestines his own blood and fecal material.

At the end of three years of these criminal attacks at foreign sites operated by cooperating intelligence agencies with the torture administered by Americans, he told his torturers what he thought they wanted to hear. Then he was transferred to the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he has remained since 2007.

Upon his arrival at Gitmo, a different set of interrogators took over. The video tapes of his hundreds of torture sessions were destroyed but not the transcripts of his confession. The purpose of the second round of interrogations was to elicit another confession by agents who could testify to a judge that they did not torture him, and that his confession to them was not coerced.

Though some of these interrogators at Gitmo were FBI agents, no one read him his Miranda warnings, advising him of his right to silence, to counsel and to the legal implications of anything he told his new interrogators. Mohammed made admissions to this second group of interrogators substantially similar to those he made to his torturers.

The government, which once denied but now admits to the torture, nevertheless was prepared to argue that his second confession was voluntary. Then, the feds had a change of heart. And, two years ago, his lawyers entered into plea negotiations, at the request of the government because the military lawyers and their Department of Justice legal colleagues concluded that they could not ethically defend torture in an American courtroom.

Federal law, the federal rules of criminal procedure, the canons of legal ethics and state bar licensing authorities all prohibit lawyers from using coerced testimony in a courtroom.

The government and all defense lawyers entered into a plea agreement that provided for full public confessions, a public confrontation by family members of 9/11 victims during which the defendants agreed to reply truthfully to their questions, and, of course, life in prison at Gitmo.

The Army general in the Pentagon in charge of all Gitmo prosecutions — herself a former military judge — approved the plea agreement, as did the military trial judge, and all five defendants.

Then, the Biden administration Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin fired the general who approved the plea agreement and revoked the Pentagon’s approval. A federal appeals court upheld his revocation. At that point, Mohammed was on his fourth military judge and his fifth team of prosecutors.

After the court affirmed the Pentagon’s change of heart, the military judge who had approved the plea agreement retired. The current and fifth judge has presumably read the 44,000 pages of documents and transcripts that 15 years of litigation has generated as he announced last week that he will rule on the admissibility of the second round of confessions this summer.

The present judge, who did not preside over any of the hundreds of hours of proceedings in the case, including those during which the horrific tortures described above were related in an American courtroom, must now decide if the second confession was voluntary. Though the government now admits that the first confession was not voluntary, its relevance here is not the words Mohammed told his torturers but the degradation of his mental faculties due to the egregious tortures such that the second confession was also not voluntary.

Was Mohammed so conditioned to the power of his interrogators that his will was attenuated?

The standard of proof that the government must meet to get the second confession admitted is voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. That’s the same high standard for proving guilt in all American courts. If the feds fail to meet this standard to the satisfaction of the judge, the case will proceed to trial without the jury hearing the confession.

This is a two-edged sword for the government. If the confession is read to the jury, then the defendants and their experts can relate to the jury all the horrific things the government did in order to produce the confessions. But if the confession does not come into evidence, then the jury will not hear of the tortures unless there is a conviction and the torture testimony is presented in mitigation of punishment.

What we have here is a lawless system of brutality. Torture and all it produces is a profound violation of natural rights, the Constitution’s guarantee of due process, as well as federal law. Even practitioners of this medieval behavior have acknowledged it produces unreliable statements. It is the tool of monsters.

On the eve of America’s 250th anniversary, we are asked to accept government at its worst; one that the Framers thought they had prohibited and one to which the governed never consented.

To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.
COPYRIGHT 2026 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

June 5, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Gitmo and Torture Revisited

The Quiet Coup That Put Israel Inside Americas Intelligence Core

By Freddie Ponton | 21st Century Wire | June 5, 2026

While Washington’s media class was loudly hyperventilating over Section 224 of the defense bill, the brazen attempt to weld the U.S. and Israeli militaries into a single high-tech fighting force, a far more consequential power shift was quietly advancing through the Senate with almost no resistance.

Section 622 of S. 4615, the Intelligence Authorisation Act for Fiscal Year 2027, is not some routine bureaucratic tweak. It is a calculated, multi-year project to permanently embed Israeli strategic priorities into the bloodstream of American intelligence.

Where Section 224 focuses on tanks, jets, and joint weapons production and AI, Section 622 targets the invisible nervous system that often matters more: raw intelligence flows, surveillance capabilities, cyber operations, data streams, and regional early-warning networks. And it has moved forward with almost zero public debate.

The bill doesn’t politely encourage closer ties. It mandates them. It orders the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to aggressively expand intelligence sharing with Israel across cyber threats, sanctions evasion, missile and drone attacks, non-state actors, and air-and-space domains. It then extends this integration to the Arab states that signed the Abraham Accords, effectively building a U.S.-backed, Israel-centred intelligence bloc across the region.

This is a five-year strategic lockdown, with Congress demanding annual reports tracking “seamless integration” of Israel into regional air and missile defense architectures, full interoperability of technology networks between the U.S., Israel, and Abraham Accords partners, and detailed catalogs of every remaining legal, technical, policy, counterintelligence, and security barrier still in the way. At this stage, one could assume that lawmakers aren’t overseeing the relationship; they’re issuing marching orders to keep deepening it.

To block any future president tempted to pull back, the bill installs heavy procedural padlocks. Section 622 prohibits any suspension, reduction, or material limitation of intelligence cooperation with Israel except in the narrow case of a “specific and identifiable national security concern,” with mandatory 15-day advance notice to Congress. Another section in the same bill adds a second tripwire, naming Israel (alongside Ukraine and Taiwan) as one of the privileged few countries that trigger immediate congressional alarm bells if support is ever curtailed.

The double standard is glaring. In Section 620, Congress carefully wrote an explicit off-ramp for Ukraine, allowing intelligence support to be limited in cases of human rights violations, atrocities, or breaches of the laws of armed conflict. For Israel, they wrote nothing of the sort. No human-rights conditions. No equivalent brake. Only extra layers of statutory armor. This was not haste or oversight but a deliberate hierarchy in which Israel First is now codified in law.

The bill doubles down on the fusion elsewhere. It expands private-sector intelligence pipelines, shields those exchanges from FOIA and public scrutiny, rolls back reporting requirements on privacy, civil liberties, and oversight risks, and accelerates artificial intelligence tools for targeting and surveillance. All of this while Israel’s notorious private surveillance industry stands ready at the receiving end.

Chief among them is NSO Group and its infamous Pegasus spyware — military-grade malware repeatedly deployed against journalists, human rights defenders, dissidents, and political opponents. The Pegasus Project, Amnesty International, Citizen Lab, and others have documented its use on targets ranging from associates of Jamal Khashoggi to reporters and activists worldwide. In 2025, a U.S. court ordered NSO Group to pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp for unlawfully hacking over 1,400 devices. Congress is widening the pipes that feed into this ecosystem while simultaneously weakening transparency and accountability.

The timing sharpens the cynicism. These binding commitments are being locked in just as Bill Pulte, a Trump loyalist pulled from housing finance with zero intelligence experience, has been installed as acting Director of National Intelligence. The architecture is being built, the guardrails are being removed, and the keys are handed to someone chosen for loyalty rather than expertise.

Section 224 and Section 622 together reveal the full picture. One noisy fight over military fusion, one stealth operation over intelligence fusion. Both push the same way, tightening integration, raising barriers to reversal, and triggering a tilt that puts Israeli security and regional dominance ahead of independent American judgment.

This is not standard alliance maintenance. It is legislative entrenchment of a one-sided special relationship at a moment when the costs, risks, and moral hazards have never been more urgent. Critics like Lara Friedman of the Foundation for Middle East Peace have sounded the alarm for good reason.

If this is what “America First” looks like in practice, the fine print exposes something much closer to Israel First, hard-coded into U.S. statute, insulated from democratic accountability, and engineered to survive any future attempt at course correction.

June 5, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Comments Off on The Quiet Coup That Put Israel Inside Americas Intelligence Core

The UK Government Will Persecute Those Vocal about Israel, But Not War Criminals

By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | June 3, 2026

After Declassified-UK revealed that around 2,000 Britons have served in the Israeli military since the beginning of the Gaza Genocide on October 7, 2023, a campaign has now been launched to demand that London pursue justice. Instead of pursuing potential war criminals, the British authorities appear too busy cracking down on critics of Israel.

A major campaign has been launched by Declassified and the International Center of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP), demanding “in the interests of transparency, public safety, and justice”, the British government adhere to the following demands:

  • “Track the movements of Brits who have served in the IDF (Israeli army – PC)”.
  • “Subject them to secondary screening where necessary at ports of entry”.
  • “Support robust war crimes investigations in line with domestic and international law”.

Producing a letter addressed to the British leadership, the campaign quickly attracted the signatures of 60 prominent individuals– including lawyers, military veterans, politicians and Genocide Scholars. The campaign was also grounded in the fact of the recent meeting of the Hague Group, where 40 States convened to demand the implementation of international law in order for Israel to be held accountable.

This is but one of various initiatives launched to achieve justice for the victims of the Gaza genocide, aligning alongside activist work, legal projects, political lobbying efforts, and even efforts through the world’s top legal bodies.

Notably, the International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrants issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant have so far failed to achieve their desired results. Similarly, South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is still pending. Having worked to discourage the usefulness of international law, these cases also highlight a clear reality: individual nations’ leaders must be forced to take action, not simply a court.

The Declassified-ICJP campaign seeks to push the UK government to implement the law, which is why so many are getting behind it, hoping that the pressure will finally make London do the right thing.

For its part, the British government has been doing precisely the opposite of what this new campaign demands. In fact, in a recent move, it decided to reject the entry of prominent Leftist commentators Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker. Instead of admitting in a public statement why they had done this, they instead fed the information to The Times newspaper, informing them that comments critical of Israel were the reason for refusing them entry.

A range of personalities, from journalists to activists and former politicians, have also notably been detained at British ports of entry, under the Terrorism Act, all because of their outspoken stances on the issue of Palestine and criticism of the Israeli government. Palestine Action was even designated a terrorist organization for launching a campaign to directly confront weapons manufacturers in the UK that are affiliated with Israel’s biggest weapons manufacturer, Elbit Systems, or supply the Israeli military directly.

Journalists like Asa Winstanley of the Electronic Intifada and activists such as Sarah Wilkinson were even subjected to police raids on their personal homes. These are not isolated cases and there have been numerous others since the beginning of the genocide.

All of this begs the question: If the free speech rights of Britons and foreign visitors to the UK are nullified when it comes to criticizing and voicing discontent at Israeli war crimes, does the British government care for domestic legislation, let alone international law? Or, is there simply an exception to Israel that puts its officials and citizens outside of the law altogether?

Take, for example, the infamous case of Shemema Begum, a British national who was brainwashed by Daesh (IS) propaganda and headed to Syria in order to become part of the group as a bride to a fighter. Begum had made this decision at 15 years of age, and as a result, the British State revoked her citizenship, refusing her entry back into the country.

Keep in mind that Begum never committed any provable war crime, much less engaged in committing genocide; she was also a young teenager when she made this decision. The UK government, however, made the determination that she was unfit for her British passport and could no longer return to the nation of her birth.

A few years after this was all decided in court and the British Home Office fought its case – after presenting its arguments as both legally binding and moral principles – there are now some 2,000 Britons who were adults who made the decision to actively fight in a military, committing what the ICJ has ruled a plausible genocide.

Thousands of UK citizens who served in a military commanded by men who now have war crimes arrest warrants issued for them, yet not a single one has been stripped of their citizenship, there is no evidence that a single one of them has even been questioned at a port of entry, let alone investigated. All of this again points back to the question of double standards and whether the UK considers Israelis as above both domestic and international law.

If the answer is that Israel is simply above the law, then this sets a dangerous precedent and poses a major security threat inside the UK and outside its borders also. If London believes that the law doesn’t apply to Israel, then its legal system loses all legitimacy in the eyes of the public and downgrades the status of the nation in the international order.

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.

June 3, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | , , , , | Comments Off on The UK Government Will Persecute Those Vocal about Israel, But Not War Criminals

Is Hungary about to give Ukraine the EU green light?

RT | June 3, 2026

Hungary is on the cusp of lifting its veto on Ukraine beginning formal accession talks with the EU, according to hints from Prime Minister Peter Magyar and strategic leaks from Brussels. But why now? And will he compromise on Hungarian rights?

Speaking alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Berlin on Tuesday, Magyar said that he is “very optimistic” that a deal can be done to guarantee the rights of Ukraine’s Hungarian minority, in exchange for his government lifting the veto.

“The negotiations are progressing encouragingly,” he said, adding “I am ready to meet with Ukraine’s president at the beginning of next week, if we manage to agree on these fundamental human rights.”

Within an hour of Magyar’s statement, Politico published an article claiming that Budapest had privately “signaled it will drop its long-standing opposition to Ukraine’s bid for EU membership,” citing four unnamed diplomats.

What did Politico say?

Politico, the Axel Springer-owned Brussels insider, reported that Magyar’s government had “privately signaled openness to lifting its veto following a meeting on Monday between Ukrainian and Hungarian experts.” The Ukrainian side, the outlet claimed, provided verbal assurances that they would resolve most of Hungary’s concerns – including the Hungarian minority’s right to use their native language in schools – and formal accession talks with Ukraine and Moldova will be opened at an EU leaders’ summit on June 15.

Why was Politico’s article important?

That this story first appeared on Politico was likely no coincidence. Politico’s neoliberal, Atlantacist worldview is literally written into the constitution of its owner, Axel Springer, and its journalists’ proximity to power in Brussels has made it the outlet of choice for all kinds of strategic communications from within the EU machine – from telegraphed policy moves like Tuesday’s report, to outsourced smear campaigns.

For example, when Belgian Prime Minister Bart de Wever shot down the European Commission’s plan to use €185 billion ($218 billion) in frozen Russian assets to finance a massive aid package for Ukraine in December 2025, Politico responded with a hit piece portraying his country as “Russia’s most valuable asset” in Europe.

Further hit pieces – all of them citing EU diplomats and officials – followed, claiming that “Europe is failing Ukraine,” de Wever “fears retaliation from [Russian President Vladimir] Putin,” and “Europe still doesn’t want to pay to save Ukraine.”

Magyar’s predecessor, Viktor Orban, derided Politico as “the Brusselian elite’s official publication” after it named him 2025’s “disruptor of the year.”

How are Hungarians treated in Ukraine?

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, around 156,000 ethnic Hungarians found themselves trapped within Ukraine’s borders, after Kiev refused to recognize a successful self-rule referendum in the region of Transcarpathia. Relations between Budapest and Kiev rapidly declined from 2017 onwards, when Ukraine passed a series of laws mandating the sole use of the Ukrainian language in schools and local government.

Tensions were further inflamed after 2022, when the Ukrainian military targeted Transcarpathians in what the Hungarian Foreign Ministry called a “brutal” military draft.

Ukraine’s language laws have been criticized by the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission for failing to safeguard minorities’ linguistic rights, and condemned by human rights organizations.

Why lift the veto now?

Orban maintained that Ukraine joining the EU would drag the bloc into open war with Russia, undercut Hungary’s agricultural sector, and effectively give a free pass to the corruption and criminality of the Ukrainian government. However, the Transcarpathia issue was the brightest of red lines for Orban, with the then-prime minister declaring in 2023 that Hungary “will not support Ukraine in any issue in international life until the previous laws that guaranteed the rights of Transcarpathian Hungarians are returned.”

Anita Orban, Magyar’s foreign minister (and no relation of Viktor), has maintained this policy, telling an interviewer last month that “until the situation of the Hungarian minority in Ukraine is resolved, we cannot make progress in any other area.”

Hungary’s concerns are laid out in an 11-point plan. Anita Orban has refused to say whether her government would compromise on these demands, but Politico noted that Ukraine would address “most” – but not all – of the points, and added that this would be done without “passing new legislation in Ukraine.”

All of this suggests that the language laws will not be repealed or replaced, and that Magyar will abandon some of the document’s points, which have not been made public. It is unclear, but likely, that Magyar and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen addressed Ukraine’s EU membership when they met to discuss frozen EU funding for Hungary last week.

Although Magyar said afterwards that the funding issue is “not connected in any way with the issue of Ukraine,” EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos said beforehand that she expects Hungary to lift the veto ahead of the June summit. With accession a pet project of von der Leyen, and with Vladimir Zelensky set to attend the summit, it is highly likely that Magyar has come under some pressure to resolve the dispute in the coming week.

Could anyone else block Ukraine’s path to the EU?

With Viktor Orban out of office, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is now considered the EU’s most Ukraine-skeptic head of state. However, while Fico maintains cordial relations with Russia and opposes all military aid to Ukraine, Zelensky claimed that the Slovak prime minister would support Ukraine’s EU membership bid after the two met in Armenia last month.

Has Zelensky’s veneration of Nazi collaborators harmed Ukraine’s EU bid?

Polish President Karol Nawrocki said last week that Ukraine “is not ready to be part of the European family,” after Zelensky granted the title ‘Heroes of the UPA’ to a Ukrainian commando unit. The UPA, or Ukrainian Insurgent Army, was the armed wing of Stepan Bandera’s Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), and collaborated with Nazi forces to murder around 100,000 Polish civilians in what is now western Ukraine between 1943 and 1945.

However, Nawrocki added that supporting Ukraine in its conflict with Russia remains Poland’s “strategic goal.”

Even if Nawrocki wanted to block Ukrainian accession, the decision would not be his to make. Poland’s government is run by Nawrocki’s pro-Brussels rivals, and Nawrocki would be unable to veto any accession treaty without finding a majority of MPs or senators to support him.

What if nothing happens?

Despite all the signs pointing to a deal between Budapest and Kiev, nothing is set in stone at the moment, and it’s possible that some last-minute obstacle could emerge between now and June 15. The passage of the summit with no deal would represent a setback for von der Leyen and her maximalist plans for Ukraine, but even if Zelensky secures formal accession talks, all of the old issues between Kiev and its European counterparts will return to the forefront: corruption, agricultural market disruption, and the prospect of a permanent welfare recipient joining the European bloc.

These long-term issues could be far more challenging for Zelensky and his officials to solve than the Transcarpathia impasse ever was.

June 3, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Comments Off on Is Hungary about to give Ukraine the EU green light?

EU pushing Armenia to expel Russian Orthodox Church – intel service

RT | June 3, 2026

The European Union is pressuring Armenia to expel the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) from the country as a prerequisite to EU integration, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has alleged.

In a statement on Wednesday, the SVR said that EU officials had made severing religious ties with Moscow a condition for closer ties with the West, a policy it said is being pursued by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan.

The landlocked nation maintains close economic ties with Russia and hosts one of Moscow’s few military bases abroad. It is set to elect a new parliament on Sunday. Critics of Pashinyan have warned that he is steering Armenia down a path similar to Ukraine’s after the 2014 Western-backed coup. One of Kiev’s hallmark policies has been a crackdown on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which authorities accuse of promoting Russian interests.

Armenia’s religious landscape differs from Ukraine’s. The country’s dominant religious institution is the Armenian Apostolic Church, an ancient denomination that broke with mainstream Christianity in the 5th century, centuries before the Great Schism between the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

The ROC does not recognize the Armenian Church as canonical, but regards it as a close Christian ally with shared traditions and common goals. The ROC maintains its own diocese in Armenia, encompassing five parish churches, a monastery, and two military chapels.

In its report, the SVR referenced a May statement by two Armenia-based NGOs that accused an ROC priest of influencing the upcoming election through his sermons, including those delivered at a church on the Russian military base in Gyumri. The agency said the allegations are part of a campaign orchestrated by Brussels and that EU operatives “are currently fabricating compromising evidence” to smear other Russian clergy.

Pashinyan’s government was rocked by mass protests in 2024 and 2025, as critics, including senior figures in the Armenian Apostolic Church, accused him of betraying national interests in his handling of the conflict settlement with neighboring Azerbaijan. The prime minister, in turn, accused his opponents of plotting a coup and launched prosecutions against the alleged organizers, including several members of the clergy.

June 3, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , | Comments Off on EU pushing Armenia to expel Russian Orthodox Church – intel service

Hungarian PM Magyar claims that he has obtained billions in EU funds, but what strings are attached?

Orbán is skeptical, writing: “Free cheese is only in the mousetrap”

Remix News | June 1, 2026

Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Magyar recently traveled to Brussels to discuss the country’s frozen EU funds, which have reportedly been withheld illegally up until now. Despite Magyar’s claims that the money would be released simply in return for fighting corruption, various media outlets are reporting there is much more to the deal than that, including indications that Hungary will have to implement the EU’s demand for migrant quotas under the Migrant Pact one way or another.

“Based on today’s meeting, €16.4 billion euros have been unlocked,” the Hungarian prime minister told the press after Friday’s meeting. However, that is also not true, as there are still many conditions the country must meet before the money is made available.

Officials from the EU commission were far more cautious with their description of the deal, saying the broad strokes of the deal had been determined, but conditions must still be met.

“We haven’t agreed to disburse the funds,” a senior commission official told Politico. “We’ve agreed on a list of commitments which, if completed by Aug. 31, will trigger the payment of those funds.”

In addition, inquiries made by journalists yielded no official details regarding the specific terms of the pact.

The announcement has sparked widespread curiosity regarding the concessions made by the Hungarian government, given that EU officials previously stated funds would only be released following specific structural reforms.

In fact, after the deal was announced, former Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán publicly demanded transparency from Magyar regarding the negotiations.

“We call on the Prime Minister to immediately publish the details of the von der Leyen-Péter Magyar pact. What did he sell to Brussels for Hungarian interests? Free cheese is only in the mousetrap,” Orbán wrote in his post.

German media outlet Tichys Einblick appears to be highly skeptical about the deal, which discussed the questions posed by journalists after the deal was allegedly reached.

“The very second question [from journalists] concerned migration policy: Will Hungary implement the Migration Pact? Ursula von der Leyen was the first to reply: Of course, people had talked about the migration pact, it was an agreement that affected and bound all Member States equally, and there had been discussion about how to get Hungary to implement this pact too. It took her a minute to answer that.

Then came Péter Magyar, who began by saying that he too would now answer ‘briefly.’ It took him five times longer than the President of the Commission, of course, and he squirmed around a clear answer. With remarkable verbal slalom technique, he explained that the migration pact was not a big deal, that it did not mean allowing migrants into the country, that one could also contribute in other ways, such as with money or contributions to border protection. (The EU had never accepted that Orbán’s border fence was Hungary’s contribution to European migration policy).

The migration pact, Magyar continued, came about in Orbán’s time, thanks to Orbán, so to speak. In summary: The migration pact is not bad, insofar as it is bad, that is Orbán’s fault, and Hungary… Well, you had to read between the lines for that, but it was actually clear from the combined statements of the two: The Magyar government will implement the migration pact in one way or another.”

While Magyar is claiming the sole condition for securing the over €16 billion was simply stamping out corruption, clearly there could be other conditions attached.

During the press conference, Ursula von der Leyen commended the swift formation of the new Hungarian government and its proactive approach, indicating a willingness to maintain this momentum in future consultations.

Questions were also raised concerning the rule of law, an area where the commission has historically demanded strict compliance before releasing frozen assets. This financial issue remains politically sensitive for the leadership in Brussels. Von der Leyen previously faced intense criticism for her handling of Poland, where funds were released to the former right-wing government before required reforms were fully executed. Furthermore, Hungary is operating under a compressed timeframe to secure the capital.

Time constraints are also a pressing factor for Ursula von der Leyen, who faces domestic political risks and previous votes of no confidence. The broader rise of the European right wing, fueled by dissatisfaction with centralized EU bureaucracy, intensifies the pressure. Any perceived mishandling or bureaucratic delay in delivering the agreed funds could draw heavy criticism from both the left and an electorate increasingly fatigued by centralized governance.

Consequently, the Commission President must balance projecting a firm stance on institutional expectations to her political base while supporting the new Hungarian prime minister, whom she visibly favors. This urgency, however, introduces systemic risks. The European Commission was asked if a rushed implementation of reforms might precipitate a constitutional crisis, mirroring events in Poland where Prime Minister Donald Tusk utilized legally questionable measures to consolidate power and disable opponents. At the time of publication, the chief spokesperson for the European Commission had not provided a response to these inquiries to Hungarian news outlet Magyar Nemzet.

June 1, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , | Comments Off on Hungarian PM Magyar claims that he has obtained billions in EU funds, but what strings are attached?

Two US political commentators banned from UK for criticizing ‘Israel’

Al Mayadeen | June 1, 2026

The UK government has blocked two prominent left-wing US political commentators, Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur, from entering the country, reportedly over remarks concerning “Israel”.

Piker, a political streamer with 1.9 million YouTube subscribers, and Uygur, co-founder of The Young Turks, said they had been denied entry to the UK. He said in a social media post that he was prevented from boarding a flight to London to attend SXSW London and deliver a speech at Oxford.

“I’ve been banned from the UK. I tried to get on a flight to London to attend SXSW London and give a speech at Oxford. I’ve been banned for criticizing “Israel”. Are we free anymore?” he wrote, adding:  “This is oppression of Western citizens by our own governments on behalf of a different country.”

Uygur also commented publicly on the decision, saying the move reflected political pressure linked to criticism of “Israel”.

Labour government bans Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur

The UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood reportedly decided to ban Uygur from entering the UK, citing concerns that his presence could “risk exacerbating antisemitism due to his rhetoric.”

Piker, who is known online as HasanAbi and previously worked with The Young Turks, said the UK had also revoked his visa “at the behest of Israel.” He wrote: “The West is betraying liberal values for a genocidal fascist foreign government. Soon we will all become Israel.”

During a video uploaded to YouTube, Piker said he had been scheduled to attend events with Jeremy Corbyn, Zack Polanski, and Yanis Varoufakis.

He also read from a letter sent by the UK government, which stated: “Your UK ETA has been cancelled. This means you cannot travel to the UK without a visa. This is because your presence in the UK is not considered to be conducive to the public good. You cannot appeal this decision.”

Western weaponization of censorship

“Israel” and its Western allies have repeatedly sought to silence journalists who expose Israeli occupation and war crimes by branding critical reporting as “terror propaganda” or anti‑Israeli incitement, rather than engaging with the documented violence on the ground.

Al Mayadeen’s experience is illustrative: Israeli authorities banned the channel’s broadcasts in occupied Palestine under emergency “security” regulations, seized its equipment, and accused its reporters of serving “enemy” interests and “pretending to be journalists”.

This aggressive censorship is reinforced in Western media ecosystems, where leaked testimonies describe unwritten rules against words like “genocide” and structural pressure on reporters and scholars to self‑censor criticism of “Israel” for fear of being smeared as “anti‑Semitic” or apologetic for “terror”, producing a climate in which speaking honestly about occupation is treated as a greater offense than the atrocities themselves.

Moreover, US and UK authorities have increasingly mirrored “Israel’s” own tactics by banning or criminalizing voices that challenge its actions, turning criticism of a foreign state into a de facto speech offense. In the UK, this has meant not only designating Palestine Action a “terrorist” organization but also arresting thousands of supporters and documenting nearly 1,000 cases where students, workers, and artists faced investigations, suspensions, or event cancellations for pro‑Palestine advocacy.

Across the Atlantic, US officials have backed or tolerated these crackdowns while pursuing their own arrests and visa actions against pro‑Palestine student leaders, signalling a transatlantic consensus that views solidarity with Palestinians and sharp scrutiny of the Israeli lobby and war crimes as a security problem to be contained rather than protected political speech

June 1, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Comments Off on Two US political commentators banned from UK for criticizing ‘Israel’

Police tried to recruit café owner as Palestine Action spy

Al Mayadeen | May 30, 2026

A Manchester café owner and prominent supporter of the Palestinian cause has accused the British police of attempting to recruit him as an informant targeting Palestine Action, offering financial incentives and suggesting authorities could overlook certain minor offenses in exchange for cooperation.

Speaking to The Guardian on Saturday, Shams Sadiq, who owns two cafes in Manchester and has been active in pro-Palestine solidarity efforts, said the approach took place when he attended Ashton-under-Lyne police station on 15 May to recover electronic devices seized during a previous investigation linked to Palestine Action.

According to Sadiq, officers informed him that after examining his devices they knew he was “fully involved” with Palestine Action but said he would not face charges related to his arrest last year. He said the discussion then shifted toward securing his assistance.

“They said to me: ‘We need your help. Look, there’s benefits in helping us,'” Sadiq told The Guardian. “I’m like: ‘What kind of benefits? Financial benefits? Are you going to pay my taxes?’ They said: ‘Oh, we can help with things like that.'”

Sadiq said another officer suggested additional incentives were available.

“The other guy said to me: ‘Oh, there’s other benefits, too.’ They said: ‘We’re not saying you can go out and commit a serious crime but we can turn a blind eye to certain things.'”

When he jokingly asked whether they could remove his speeding tickets, Sadiq said the officers responded, “We don’t care about speeding.”

The 51-year-old believes the officers were attempting to recruit him as an informer because of his involvement in Palestine solidarity activities and his standing within Manchester’s Muslim community.

“He interpreted ‘help’ to mean ‘with their investigations [into Palestine Action] because they said I am involved and maybe be an informer. They also said I’m quite respected in my community, so maybe they think I would help them find Muslims in the mosque with extreme views.'”

Activism under scrutiny

The allegations emerge amid increasing scrutiny of pro-Palestine activism in Britain and growing concerns among campaigners over the use of counterterrorism powers against activists and community organizers.

Days before the alleged recruitment attempt, Sadiq said he was stopped and questioned at Manchester Airport under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act after returning from a holiday in Morocco.

He said officers questioned him for more than three hours about Palestine Action, Iran, and his personal finances, including details related to his mortgage. During the interrogation, he said officers also asked how he would respond if someone attending his mosque expressed extremist views. His electronic devices were seized during the encounter.

According to Sadiq, the same officers later met him at a Starbucks inside Terminal 2, where they returned the devices and apologized for the airport questioning.

Anti-terror powers

A vocal advocate for Palestine, Sadiq has participated in demonstrations and supported campaigns and cultural events highlighting Palestinian issues. His public support has previously made him a target, with one of his cafes subjected to harassment because of his pro-Palestine stance.

Sadiq said the officers also told him that they could provide protection for him and his family and gave him a contact number, making it clear that he did not have to decide immediately whether to cooperate.

He said he chose to speak publicly after rejecting the proposal, believing that public exposure offered the best protection.

“I feel like I need protection from the police rather than anything else. It’s scary that I’ve got this marker on my passport for doing nothing. If they’ve got something on me, then charge me.”

His solicitor, Simon Pook of Robert Lizar Solicitors, condemned the alleged conduct and questioned whether anti-terrorism legislation had been used as a pretext to pressure a political activist into collaborating with authorities.

“We’re unhappy that he was put in that position and offered inducements to work for the state,” Pook said. “Was the intention always to use the schedule 7 in order to offer the inducement? If that is the true intention, schedule 7 was used unlawfully, because it’s got to be used where you believe somebody may be involved in or in an act of preparation of terrorism.”

Greater Manchester Police declined to comment on the allegations.

Palestine Action ban sparks civil liberties concerns

The allegations come against the backdrop of a broader crackdown on Palestine Action, a direct-action movement known for targeting facilities linked to Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems and other companies accused of supplying weapons used in “Israel’s” genocidal campaign in Gaza.

The organization gained prominence through occupations, blockades, and acts of property damage aimed at disrupting the production and shipment of military equipment destined for “Israel”. Supporters argue that the group’s actions sought to halt material support for the genocide in Gaza, while critics accused the movement of engaging in unlawful sabotage.

In July 2025, the British government designated Palestine Action a “terrorist organization” following a high-profile action at RAF Brize Norton, where activists entered the airbase and spray-painted military aircraft. The move marked the first time a direct-action protest group had been proscribed under British terrorism legislation, placing it in the same legal category as armed militant organizations.

The decision was widely condemned by civil liberties advocates, legal experts, UN rights experts, and pro-Palestine organizations, which argued that existing criminal laws were already sufficient to address any alleged offenses committed by activists. Critics warned that the proscription represented a dangerous expansion of counterterrorism powers into the realm of political protest and dissent.

Since the ban, thousands of people have reportedly been arrested across Britain for expressing support for Palestine Action, including activists, academics, religious figures, and anti-war campaigners. Supporters of the group say activists have faced heightened surveillance, airport stops, device seizures, lengthy investigations, and the threat of imprisonment for activities they view as part of a broader movement opposing Israel’s war on Gaza.

The controversy intensified in February 2026 when the High Court ruled that the government’s ban on Palestine Action was unlawful and disproportionate, finding that ministers had failed to properly justify the use of terrorism legislation against the group. However, the ban remains in force while the government appeals the decision.

For many Palestine solidarity campaigners, Sadiq’s claims reinforce concerns that anti-terrorism powers are increasingly being used to monitor, pressure, and gather intelligence on individuals involved in pro-Palestinian activism rather than to address genuine security threats.

May 30, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Islamophobia | , | Comments Off on Police tried to recruit café owner as Palestine Action spy

Bulgaria facing EU punishment months after joining eurozone

RT | May 30, 2026

Bulgaria is facing EU sanctions due to an excessive budget deficit, just months after joining the eurozone, Prime Minister Rumen Radev has said. He claimed that the crisis was caused by the previous pro-EU government, which massaged economic numbers to narrowly pass the threshold to join the eurozone in the first place.

Speaking at a cabinet meeting in Sofia on Friday, Radev, who is widely regarded as an EU skeptic, said that the European Commission would publish its formal report on the country’s fiscal situation on June 3, thus launching the so-called excessive deficit procedure.

Under the procedure, Sofia must bring spending from last year’s 3.5% back below the 3% ceiling by putting a binding cap on the budget deficit. If Bulgaria fails, the EU can freeze funding and go as far as to impose fines of up to 0.05% of GDP every six months on the Balkan country.

Radev blamed the situation on a “difficult legacy” stemming from “negligence, incompetence, voluntarism, populism, and financial misconduct” by the previous center-right and pro-EU Zhelyazkov government, which collapsed in December 2025 following mass anti-corruption protests.

The prime minister also predicted that “this year, the deficit will be even larger” than 3.5%. The European Commission forecasts that the deficit will hit 4.1% of GDP this year, rising to 4.3% in 2027.

“They [the previous government] lied to push Bulgaria into the euro… The bubble has burst,” he said of the budget deficit.

Bulgaria joined the eurozone on January 1, 2026, after barely meeting the criteria, especially in terms of inflation, which was the greatest hurdle. Proponents of the push sought to lock Bulgaria on the pro-West and pro-EU path, with practical monetary consequences deemed minimal as the Bulgarian lev had been pegged to the euro for decades.

However, critics have argued that the Zhelyazkov coalition – which supported eurozone membership – projected an unrealistic revenue growth, with potential to balloon the budget deficit.

A Politico report in 2025 also drew attention to a sudden and “mysterious” 82.8% cut in state-set daily hospital fees in April – a move that helped lower Bulgaria’s 12-month average inflation. At the time, an unnamed former local official told the paper that “the only reason Bulgaria has qualified is… due to state-administered prices.” According to Politico, the previous government also cut inflation by slashing rail fares by over 9%.

Radev – who has advocated for more pragmatic ties with Russia and consistently opposed military aid to Ukraine – was not against the eurozone per se, but insisted that such a decision could be made only on a public referendum.

However, the parliament blocked his request, with critics accusing him of trying to sabotage the process. Radev himself said that Bulgarian citizens were being ignored by an elite “marching toward the eurozone” and that “the representatives of the people denied the people their right to choose.”

May 30, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Economics | , | Comments Off on Bulgaria facing EU punishment months after joining eurozone

Le Pen leads every major rival in new French presidential runoff polling

By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | May 29, 2026

Marine Le Pen would beat every major rival in a second-round French presidential election runoff, according to new polling that hypothesized her eligibility to stand in the election expected in April next year.

A Toluna-Harris Interactive poll for M6 and RTL, conducted on May 27, found Le Pen ahead in all three tested runoff scenarios when she is the National Rally candidate.

The strongest result came against far-left leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon, with Le Pen taking 67 percent to his 33 percent. She also defeated former Prime Minister Gabriel Attal by 54 percent to 46 percent, and former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe by 52 percent to 48 percent.

The figures are significant because Philippe and Attal are among the most prominent names in the broader Macron-aligned camp, which has long presented itself as the main barrier to a National Rally victory. Le Pen has twice lost runoff elections to Macron, back in 2017 and 2022.

Yet the poll suggests that even the strongest establishment contenders would currently fall short against Le Pen in a head-to-head vote.

Le Pen is currently barred from running after being handed an immediate five-year ban from public office, but she has appealed the ruling. A decision on that appeal is expected on July 7. Should she remain unable to run, National Rally president Jordan Bardella is widely expected to become the party’s presidential candidate.

That would still leave National Rally in a commanding position. Earlier polling this week showed Bardella leading the first round with 32 percent, well ahead of Philippe on 17 percent and Mélenchon on 16 percent. The same May Odoxa political barometer also showed Bardella beating Philippe in a second-round runoff by 52 percent to 48 percent, reversing the result recorded two months earlier, when Philippe had led by the same margin.

Taken together, the surveys point to a deepening problem for France’s centrist and left-wing parties. Whether the candidate is Le Pen or Bardella, the National Rally is now polling not merely as a first-round protest vehicle, but as a party capable of winning the presidency outright.

If Le Pen’s appeal succeeds, she would enter the race as the most formidable candidate in the field. If it fails, Bardella would inherit a political landscape in which the National Rally brand is already ahead of its most likely rivals.

On Friday, Le Pen announced her intention, should the National Rally win the presidency, to offer the French public a referendum on mass immigration.

“The French people have been betrayed. In 2027, we will restore a democratic vitality to France by returning power to the people,” she wrote on X.

May 30, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Comments Off on Le Pen leads every major rival in new French presidential runoff polling

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »