It’s the story of a house of cards. It took months to build it. Meticulously, floor by floor. The building was almost finished, all that was missing was the roof. It was then that its architect, overcome by a fit of anger, decided to send it flying with a big kick. This house of cards had a name: institutionalization. And the architect, a well-known surname: Marine Le Pen. By deciding, Monday, December 2, to join the voices of the RN to those of the left to censor the Barnier government, the latter stopped in its tracks the strategy of no vagueness started since the legislative elections of June 2022. The leader would the extreme right have been afraid, all of a sudden, of this much-desired recognition?
She who, in a few weeks, obtained more pledges and consideration from the government than her party had in fifty years of existence. Michel Barnier, in the hope of getting his budget voted on, gave in to the frontist, in a beady manner, on several demanded measures: the cancellation of the tax on electricity and the reimbursement of medicines in particular. The withdrawal of this measure was even announced on Monday by a press release quoting Marine Le Pen by name. “Many requests have been expressed on this subject. Ms. Marine Le Pen, on behalf of the National Rally, reminded the Prime Minister of this again this morning during a telephone exchange,” writes Matignon. The quote is worth anointing. Here is the RN, extracted from its quarantine, become a “party like any other” and Marine Le Pen the government’s main interlocutor on the eve of a decisive vote.
Wouldn’t Marine Le Pen revel in her role as pariah?
Measures, status, consideration. What more could you ask for? These marks of deference, however, did not satisfy the expectations of the frontist. The ax has fallen: Marine Le Pen overturns the negotiating table and will censure the government. What actually happened? Not at ease in the costume of the constructive opponent, here she is again become an engineer of chaos. Wouldn’t Marine Le Pen revel in her role as pariah? She likes to repeat this lament: for the RN “everything is always more difficult”. This time, however, everything seemed different. Still insufficient?
Second hypothesis. Has Marine Le Pen, following the government’s multiple concessions, become too greedy? Me that I make such a poor dear, and who do they take me for? The collapse of the house of cards may have been caused by a kick, but it was out of pride that it was thrown. Because the history of this censorship is also that of vexation. We had sworn to the MP and her flock that they would be treated with respect by Michel Barnier. Hadn’t the latter himself called her to apologize for the infamous comments made by one of his ministers? But in politics, as in love, there are only actions that count. First, the frontist leader did not appreciate that the Prime Minister did not consult her sooner to collect her requests. Then, and above all, she had very little taste for the comments of those close to Michel Barnier, scattered in the press, following their meeting last week. “They took great pleasure in telling all over Paris that she was more or less a fool,” explains a strategist. “So when we are received at the last moment, at a time when it is almost impossible to modify the text, and when the guys pour a torrent of filth into your face from behind, you don’t really want to save them.”
Third hypothesis: the judicial calendar
“Barnier, ultimately, it’s worse than Attal or Borne, deplores Thomas Ménage, RN deputy for Loiret. It’s “look, I treat them”, he sends a few crumbs, but the contempt remains the same .” It is this contempt that Marine Le Pen grew tired of and which, it is said, cost Michel Barnier his head. “They want our voices but not our faces, we’ve been living this for forty years,” she assured Friday. in the columns of Worldexasperated that the Prime Minister did not concede that he had renounced the increase in electricity taxes for his own sake.
Third hypothesis: the judicial calendar. It is the favorite of the majority, who like to repeat that Marine Le Pen’s decision is above all linked to the risk of ineligibility which weighs over her since the requisitions of her trial. And the argument has the gift of irritating him. “There are zero issues, zero consequences of this court decision on the decisions that I will have to make as group president, and I make it a point of honor,” she swore on November 27 , from the Paris Criminal Court. “It’s still quite insulting, and it irritated everyone, assures a right-hand man. It’s as if we were saying that without his medical examinations, Michel Barnier would have been gentler and more inclined to discussion.”
Marine Le Pen and the right
Nevertheless, we still like, at the RN, to imagine the hypothesis of a resignation which would provoke an early presidential election and would have the merit of preserving their champion. If indeed it took place before March 31, the date of the verdict for Marine Le Pen. “If we bring down three Prime Ministers in a row, what other choice will Emmanuel Macron have than to resign?” asks a deputy. The new element of language is given by Marine Le Pen herself, Monday, in the room of the four columns at the Assembly: “The President of the Republic has three possibilities: reshuffle, dissolution and resignation.” Here is what she now expects from censorship.
In her camp, some, of course, tried to dissuade her from this path. In particular his economic advisor, François Durvye, also right-hand man of the reactionary billionaire Pierre-Edouard Stérin. Until the last moment, he pleaded in favor of a relaxation, taking into account the guarantees already obtained, and above all wishing not to put off the right-wing electorate, more attached to institutional stability and fearful of witnessing a collapse. markets. Response from the Lepénist entourage, which ended up winning: “What’s the point of negotiating a bargain and being seen as a substitute for a government which remains, for us, an opponent?”
Risk and pleasure
Above all: Marine Le Pen is not a particular fan of voters or representatives of the right, whom she has always despised and who, often, reciprocated it. She was also exasperated by the political and media “lesson givers”, from the benches of the Assembly to the columns of the Figarowho accused him of being on the verge of causing a financial crisis. Its original electorate was in favor of censorship. And then she is certain: when the time comes, between a left-wing candidate or herself, the right will vote for her, constrained and forced. Between trying to please a camp that she despises or satisfying her historical base, Marine Le Pen has therefore decided. Annoyed, too, to have been underestimated for too long or suspected of bluffing by the government as well as by the majority. Ego, when you hold us.
For once, Marine Le Pen had fun. She takes her risk, too. Of course, the minimum after-sales service has been ensured. We sent the RN deputies to put out the fire with the journalists, in the Salle des Quatre Columns, to explain that all of this was the fault of Gabriel Attal who, by refusing to allow the majority to concede anything to the RN, had pushed Marine Le Pen into the arms of censorship. Yes, Marine Le Pen and her troops will vote on the LFI motion of censure (in which their intentions are described as “vile obsessions”). And the question remains, all the same: what will happen if the markets panic? Now is not the time to panic. We also overplay calm. “We must put things into perspective, nothing will happen,” assure all the frontists, massively sharing analyzes ensuring that the announced budget deficit will not take place. Although… The question continues to spread. What if Marine Le Pen had missed the last step of her notability? Has the Frontist leader reread La Fontaine since? Did she risk losing by wanting to win too much?
.