Budget, retraites: Bayrou et les socialistes proches d’un accord de non censure
Vont-ils arriver à bon port malgré les écueils? François Bayrou et les socialistes semblent proches mardi d’un accord de non censure, en échange d’une renégociation rapide de la réforme des retraites et de concessions budgétaires.Il n’y aura “ni suspension ni abrogation” de la réforme des retraites mais une renégociation pendant trois mois environ, soit avant un nouveau changement de classe d’âge pour le départ à la retraite, a affirmé le Premier ministre à Matignon mardi matin devant ses soutiens, selon plusieurs participants, à quelques heures de sa déclaration de politique générale.”Il faut que les partenaires sociaux aient terminé leurs travaux avant” la date butoir de changement de classe d’âge, soit “avant l’été” pour rendre “effectives” leurs conclusions, et dans ce cas “la suspension n’est plus nécessaire”, a détaillé un des participants.Selon un responsable de gauche, la proposition de François Bayrou serait conforme à celle formulée lundi soir par téléphone par le patron des socialistes Olivier Faure. “Nous sommes peut-être à quelques encablures, quelques heures d’un accord possible”, avait affirmé quelques heures plus tôt sur BFMTV et RMC le Premier secrétaire du PS Olivier Faure, qui en échange ne censurerait pas la déclaration de politique générale ni les projets de budget.Olivier Faure a rapporté aussi avoir obtenu “un nombre de concessions (…) remarquables” sur le budget “parce qu’elles permettent de rompre avec ce que nous avons censuré, c’est-à -dire le budget Barnier”.- “Volonté d’y arriver” -Les socialistes devaient réunir un Bureau national (direction) à 13H00, soit deux heures avant la déclaration de politique générale de François Bayrou qui dévoilera devant l’Assemblée nationale ses intentions.A Matignon, on se veut plus prudent. “Tant que c’est pas +topé+ avec le PS, c’est pas +topé+. Mais il y a une volonté d’y arriver”, confirme-t-on.Ironie du sort, c’est Élisabeth Borne, ex-Première ministre et auteure de cette réforme contestée des retraites, qui lira en parallèle devant le Sénat le même texte, où pourraient figurer des concessions à sa propre loi, adoptée à l’époque au forceps en utilisant l’article 49.3.Au centre des tensions, la révision de l’âge de départ fixé à 64 ans par la loi de 2023 par une négociation qui associerait les partenaires sociaux et traiterait également du financement. Les socialistes réclamaient ces derniers jours que la suspension de la réforme des retraites soit effective dès le début de la renégociation de la loi, et pas uniquement en cas de succès de celle-ci. Or si les discussions ont lieu entre deux changements de classes d’âge, aucune suspension n’est nécessaire.- Évolutions “financées” -Reste à savoir ce que cela voudrait dire concrètement. Les personnes nées en 1963 pourraient-elles partir à 62 ans et 6 mois (avec une durée de cotisation de 42 ans et un trimestre) au lieu de 62 ans et 9 mois (avec une durée de 42,5 ans) comme prévu ?Si à la différence de son prédécesseur Michel Barnier, piégé par le RN, François Bayrou mise sur la gauche pour rester au pouvoir, il ne doit pas non plus braquer ses alliés à droite.A droite, on se félicitait qu’il n’y ait pas de suspension de la réforme. “Charge aux partenaires sociaux de réfléchir à des évolutions” de la réforme mais des évolutions “financées”, a complété un participant à une réunion du groupe Les Républicains (LR), saluant par ailleurs le fait qu’il n’y ait “pas de nouveaux impôts” dans le projet de budget.Alors que le camp présidentiel se divise sur une suspension de la réforme, un de ses cadres se dit prêt à valider l’arrangement en discussion. “Il y a un problème financier c’est évident. Sur un agenda de trois mois – très court – s’il y a un accord des partenaires sociaux pour une procédure différente et qui soit favorable financièrement, on le prend”.Pas de suspension, c’est “une bonne nouvelle vu la situation économique”, a estimé pour sa part Naïma Moutchou, vice-présidente Horizons de l’Assemblée nationale.Quelles que soient les annonces de François Bayrou, les Insoumis déposeront une motion de censure qui sera examinée jeudi ou vendredi. La rupture semble consommée entre socialistes et Insoumis. Si les communistes semblent disposés à suivre le PS, la cheffe des Écologistes Marine Tondelier a en revanche répondu à l’AFP “ne pas comprendre l’euphorie des socialistes”, et juge que “l’état actuel des discussions ne donne pas de raison d’envisager autre chose que la censure”.La motion de censure LFI n’a cependant aucune chance d’être adoptée puisque le RN a confirmé qu’il ne la voterait pas.
Trump would have been convicted if he wasn’t elected: special counsel report
US President-elect Donald Trump would have been convicted for his alleged effort to overturn the 2020 election result if he hadn’t been re-elected four years later, said a report by then special counsel Jack Smith released early Tuesday.In a case that never went to trial, Trump, who returns to the White House on Monday, was accused of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.However, the US Department of Justice’s “view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a President is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Office stands fully behind,” said the report, which was released after midnight.”Indeed, but for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the Presidency, the (Special Counsel’s) Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.”The proceeding referred to in the charges was the session of Congress called to certify President Joe Biden’s election win that was violently attacked on January 6, 2021, by a mob of Trump’s supporters who stormed the US Capitol.Smith, who was special counsel appointed to investigate Trump, dropped the case after the Republican won November’s presidential election, citing the Justice Department’s policy of not prosecuting a sitting president.Trump, 78, hit back on his Truth Social platform soon after the report’s release, calling Smith “deranged”, and adding that he “was unable to successfully prosecute the Political Opponent of his ‘boss’.””To show you how desperate Deranged Jack Smith is, he released his Fake findings at 1:00 A.M. in the morning,” Trump added in another post.Trump’s attorneys had earlier urged US Attorney General Merrick Garland not to release the report, calling the plan to disclose it “unlawful, undertaken in bad faith, and contrary to the public interest.”- ‘Change the results’ -Smith’s report details Trump’s alleged efforts to persuade state-level Republican lawmakers and leaders to “change the results” of the 2020 election.”Mr. Trump contacted state legislators and executives, pressured them with false claims of election fraud in their states, and urged them to take action to ignore the vote counts and change the results,” according to the report released by the Department of Justice.”Significantly, he made election claims only to state legislators and executives who shared his political affiliation and were his political supporters, and only in states that he had lost,” it said.In addition, the report alleges Trump and co-conspirators planned to organize individuals who would have served as his electors, if he had won the popular vote, in seven states where he lost — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — “and cause them to sign and send to Washington false certifications claiming to be the legitimate electors.”They ultimately “used the fraudulent certificates to try to obstruct the congressional certification proceeding,” the report says, adding that Trump had “engaged in an unprecedented criminal effort” to overturn the election results “in order to retain power.”The report says Trump’s untruths included dozens of demonstrably false claims that large numbers of ineligible voters, such as non-citizens, had cast ballots, and that voting machines had changed votes that had been for him.Trump, however, knew there was no fraud that would affect the election’s outcome and that he had lost, according to the report, in part because then vice-president Mike Pence and his advisers told him there was no evidence for his claims.The report says that, on January 2, 2021, days before election tallies would be certified, Trump called Georgia’s secretary of state and pushed him to “find 11,780 votes” — Biden’s margin of victory in the southern state.When the state official refuted Trump’s false claims, the then-president threatened him, the report says.Trump faces separate racketeering charges in Georgia over his efforts to subvert the election results in the state. That case will likely be frozen while he is in office.The special counsel office concluded that “Trump’s conduct violated several federal criminal statutes and that the admissible evidence would be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction.”Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, dismissed another federal case against the former and future president last year — over Trump’s handling of top secret documents after leaving the White House — but charges are still pending against two of his former co-defendants.Smith left the justice department last week, days after submitting his final report as special counsel.In another case, a judge sentenced Trump to an unconditional discharge on Friday for covering up hush money payments to a porn star despite the president-elect’s efforts to avoid becoming the first felon in the White House.
‘Persepolis’ author refuses French award over Iran ‘hypocrisy’
French-Iranian author and illustrator Marjane Satrapi, best known for the book and film “Persopolis”, has refused the French legion d’honneur over the country’s “hypocrisy” in its dealings with Iran.In a letter to France’s culture minister posted on social media on Monday, Satrapi said she would not accept the top state award at a ceremony planned later this month.”I can’t ignore what I see as a hypocritical attitude towards Iran, which forged the other part of my identity,” she wrote, adding that she meant no disrespect to the award.In a post on Instagram, the 55-year-old explained her thinking in more detail, citing France’s visa policies, which prevent dissidents leaving Iran for the European country.”I can’t continue seeing the children of Iranian oligarchs come to spend their holidays in France, even become naturalised, while at the same time young dissidents have difficulty in obtaining a tourist visa to come to see what the country of the Enlightenment and human rights looks like,” she wrote.Satrapi, an outspoken critic of Iran’s theocratic regime, arrived in France in 1994 and gained French nationality in 2006.”When you have people who are fighting for democracy… you need to support them,” she told AFP on Monday. She joins an illustrious list of artists and intellectuals to have refused the legion d’honneur.They include philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre and, more recently, Nobel Prize-winning author Annie Ernaux and left-wing economist Thomas Piketty.Past controversial recipients of the state award include Russian President Vladimir Putin and deposed Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. Persopolis recounts the story of Satrapi’s early life in Tehran, struggling under the restrictions imposed by Iran’s Islamic leadership after the 1979 revolution, before she is sent to Europe by her parents and begins a life in exile.