In France, politics is happening at a ferocious pace.
This country – big, wealthy, influential and vital to the stability of Europe – is suddenly facing a moment of tumult. Change, and perhaps really big change, is looming.
There are election posters up everywhere, candidates staring out at you with fixed grins and slogans. But there is one face that seems to appear more than anyone else – Marine Le Pen.
A fixture in French politics for a quarter of a century, she has stood for president, rebuilt her party, and even remoulded France’s far-right conversation. But now, more than ever, she sits on the brink of real power.
After Sunday’s election, the polls suggest that her far-right Rassemblement National (RN) will be the biggest winner, even allowing for the curious complexities of the French system.
A left-wing alliance will probably come second with the centre-ground party of President Emmanuel Macron trailing along in third.
If – and it’s a huge, wobbly, unreliable if – the RN were to get most seats in the National Assembly, the country would be transformed.
More on Emmanuel Macron
Related Topics:
Madame Le Pen’s protege, the 28-year-old Jordan Bardella, would inevitably be installed as prime minister, working uneasily alongside a president who loathes pretty much everything that the RN stands for.
Mr Bardella would want much tougher laws against immigration, and against supporting immigrants.
Advertisement
He would also want to unwind some of Macron’s economic reforms and is much more sceptical about European integration than Macron.
How, you might wonder, could these two politicians work together in any meaningful way?
It would pave the way for instability, but also for the RN to flex real political clout.
And it would also lead to Ms Le Pen, once again, running for president. And as I write this, she is the favourite to win that contest, too.
But back to that big “if”.
France has a two-round voting system, with a week in between ballots. Candidates knocked out in the first round often advise their supporters who to back in the decisive second ballot. People might change their minds anyway.
The results from the first influence the way people behave in the second. A higher turnout may help the RN, except in the big cities, where it will probably help their opponents. It is a confusing, noisy mechanism almost everyone agrees on two things.
Firstly, the RN, led by Le Pen but also focused upon Mr Bardella, is destined to win more seats than any other party. And, secondly, this is all the more frenetic because it came out of the blue.
Make no mistake, a month ago, none of this was predicted. Sure, everyone knew that the Renaissance party of President Emmanuel Macron was likely to suffer a bloody nose during the European elections.
The RN, powered by disaffection with Macron and the populist, anti-immigration, “France First” rhetoric of Ms Le Pen and the youthful Mr Bardella, was certain to prosper.
But history is littered with mid-term elections that produce curious results. Macron, surely, would just shrug it off.
Except he didn’t.
Humbled by the scale of his defeat, Macron went on French television within minutes to announce that he was doing the very thing that his enemies in the RN had demanded – using his presidential power to dissolve parliament and call for fresh elections within weeks.
His logic was that the nation – his nation – would somehow come to its senses and turn its back on radical politics in general, and the RN in particular. And the evidence is that, fuelled by his own iron-clad self-belief, he got that wrong.
So what’s happening? More than anything, this is about two big political waves meeting each other. The first one has to do with Macron himself, whose popularity has simply declined. The second has to do with the ripple of populism that is moving through so many countries.
When he stormed to the presidency seven years ago, he was seen by many as the fresh new start that France needed – a dynamic young man, just 39 years old, who would shake up the nation and bring back some sense of dynamism and glory.
In the run-off against Ms Le Pen, he pitched himself as the politician of optimism, and her as a figure of hate. It worked – he won easily.
His follow-up victory a couple of years ago was less overwhelming but still comfortable. But then he lost control of the parliament and his control waned.
The old complaints came back – that he is, to quote an accusation I’ve heard countless times – the “president for the rich”; that he doesn’t understand the problems of normal people; that his interest is in promoting himself, not his country.
During the violent riots in Nanterre last year, Mr Macron’s government looked hopelessly leaden, while his efforts to raise the retirement age caused widespread fury.
His opponents from the centre have fragmented but his rivals on the left and right have become emboldened.
So while Mr Macron has tried to sound reasonable and emollient, he’s faced strident, unapologetic rhetoric from left and right, which has found an ever-greater audience.
Mr Macron is still a young man by the standards of global political leaders but perhaps his nation is now fed up with him, particularly at a time when so much space in the European political arena is being taken by leaders who favour strident opinions over considered nuance.
The French just have to look over their border with Italy, after all, to see how Giorgia Meloni’s brand of right-wing populism has prospered.
Look, perhaps, at the success in the Netherlands of Geert Wilders, a man who, like Ms Le Pen, spent decades in the political margins, confident that one day his time would come.
Or consider the volume of support given to the farmers who brought France’s motorways to a halt, angry with governments in Paris and Brussels.
The RN has tapped into that discontent and also benefited from it.
Sky News Data has analysed voting data from across France and drawn a few clear links that occur again and again.
In places where unemployment is high, such as near the border with Spain, or where disposable income is low, such as northwest France, the RN scores highly.
Madame Le Pen herself represents one of these places in the assembly – the 11th constituency of Pas-de-Calais. It includes Henin-Beaumont, a coal-mining town where she used to be a councillor and which is now an RN stronghold.
All around it are slag-heaps, now covered in grass. They are a reminder of the town’s past and also induce a widespread and lingering sense of resentment that the area, and its people, have been left behind.
If politics is a horseshoe, this is Mr Macron’s problem. The far-left leaders, like Jean-Luc Melenchon, condemn the President for not doing enough to protect workers and for damaging the fabric of society. So, too, do Ms Le Pen, Mr Bardella and the far-right.
Their solutions are different, with Mr Melenchon’s rhetoric focusing on tax rises for the rich and stronger workers’ rights, while Ms Le Pen talks about immigration and protectionism, but perhaps the specifics don’t matter.
The fact is that after years of leadership from the centre, France is now increasingly looking to its margins.
We know the RN will do well, so the question is now just how well. And if they don’t take an absolute majority, and if Mr Macron resists appointing Mr Bardella as prime minister, what happens then?
Will the French government grind to a halt, gummed up by political divisions that stop anything being done?
Could Macron, as proud a leader as you’ll find, ever really be pushed into resignation?
We simply don’t know. And that is what makes this election so enthralling but also slightly unnerving.
The US has announced it has increased its reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
In a statement on Friday, the US treasury said up to $25m is being offered for information leading to the arrest of Mr Maduro and his named interior minister Diosdado Cabello.
Up to $15m is also being offered for information on the incoming defence minister Vladimir Padrino. Further sanctions have also been introduced against the South American country’s state-owned oil company and airline.
The reward was announced as Mr Maduro was sworn in for a third successive term as the Venezuelan president, following a disputed election win last year.
Elvis Amoroso, head of the National Electoral Council, said at the time Mr Maduro had secured 51% of the vote, beating his opponent Edmundo Gonzalez, who won 44%.
But while Venezuela’s electoral authority and top court declared him the winner, tallies confirming Mr Maduro’s win were never released. The country’s opposition also insists that ballot box level tallies show Mr Gonzalez won in a landslide.
Nationwide protests broke out over the dispute, with a brawl erupting in the capital Caracas when dozens of police in riot gear blocked the demonstrations and officers used tear gas to disperse them.
More on Nicolas Maduro
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:40
From July 2024: Protests after Venezuela election results
While being sworn in at the national assembly, Mr Maduro said: “May this new presidential term be a period of peace, of prosperity, of equality and the new democracy.”
He also accused the opposition of attempting to turn the inauguration into a “world war,” adding: “I have not been made president by the government of the United States, nor by the pro-imperialist governments of Latin America.”
Lammy: Election ‘neither free nor fair’
The UK and EU have also introduced new sanctions against Venezuelan officials – including the president of Venezuela’s supreme court Caryslia Beatriz Rodriguez Rodriguez and the director of its criminal investigations department Asdrubal Jose Brito Hernandez.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said Mr Maduro’s “claim to power is fraudulent” and that last year’s election “was neither free nor fair”.
“The UK will not stand by as Maduro continues to oppress, undermine democracy, and commit appalling human rights violations,” he added.
Mr Maduro and his government have always rejected international sanctions as illegitimate measures that amount to an “economic war” designed to cripple Venezuela.
Those targeted by the UK’s sanctions will face travel bans and asset freezes, preventing them from entering the country and holding funds or economic resources.
Donald Trump has been handed a no-penalty sentence following his conviction in the Stormy Daniels hush money case.
The incoming US president has received an unconditional discharge – meaning he will not face jail time, probation or a fine.
Manhattan Judge Juan M Merchan could have jailed him for up to four years.
The sentencing in Manhattan comes just 10 days before the 78-year-old is due to be inaugurated as US president for a second time on 20 January.
Trump appeared at the hearing by video link and addressed the court before he was sentenced, telling the judge the case had been a “very terrible experience” for him.
He claimed it was handled inappropriately and by someone connected with his political opponents – referring to Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg.
Trump said: “It was done to damage my reputation so I would lose the election.
“This has been a political witch hunt.
“I am totally innocent. I did nothing wrong.”
Concluding his statement, he said: “I was treated very unfairly and I thank you very much.”
The judge then told the court it was up to him to “decide what is a just conclusion with a verdict of guilty”.
He said: “Never before has this court been presented with such a unique and remarkable set of circumstances.
“This has been a truly extraordinary case.”
He added that the “trial was a bit of a paradox” because “once the doors closed it was not unique”.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass had earlier argued in court that Trump “engaged in a campaign to undermine the rule of law” during the trial.
“He’s been unrelenting in his attacks against this court, prosecutors and their family,” Mr Steinglass said.
“His dangerous rhetoric and unconstitutional conduct has been a direct attack on the rule of law and he has publicly threatened to retaliate against the prosecutors.”
Mr Steinglass said this behaviour was “designed to have a chilling effect and to intimidate”.
Trump’s lawyers argued that evidence used during the trial violated last summer’s Supreme Court ruling giving Trump broad immunity from prosecution over acts he took as president.
He was found guilty in New York of 34 counts of falsifying business records relating to payments made to Ms Daniels, an adult film actor,before he won the 2016 US election.
Prosecutors claimed he had paid her $130,000 (£105,300) in hush money to not reveal details of what Ms Daniels said was a sexual relationship in 2006.
Trump has denied any liaison with Ms Daniels or any wrongdoing.
The trial made headlines around the world but the details of the case or Trump’s conviction didn’t deter American voters from picking him as president for a second time.
What is an unconditional discharge?
Under New York state law, an unconditional discharge is a sentence imposed “without imprisonment, fine or probation supervision”.
The sentence is handed down when a judge is “of the opinion that no proper purpose would be served by imposing any condition upon the defendant’s release”, according to the law.
It means Trump’s hush money case has been resolved without any punishment that could interfere with his return to the White House.
Unconditional discharges have been handed down in previous cases where, like Trump, people have been convicted of falsifying business records.
They have also been applied in relation to low-level offences such as speeding, trespassing and marijuana-related convictions.
Leicester City’s owners have launched a landmark lawsuit against a helicopter manufacturer following the club chairman’s death in a crash in 2018.
Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha’s family are suing Italian company Leonardo SpA for £2.15bn after the 60-year-old chairman and four others were killed when their helicopter crashed just outside the King Power Stadium in October 2018.
The lawsuit is the largest fatal accident claim in English history, according to the family’s lawyers. They are asking for compensation for the loss of earnings and other damages, as a result of the billionaire’s death.
The legal action comes more than six years after the fatal crash and as an inquest into the death of the 60-year-old chairman and his fellow passengers is set to begin on Monday.
Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s son Khun Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha, who took over as the club’s chairman, said: “My family feels the loss of my father as much today as we ever have done.
“That my own children, and their cousins will never know their grandfather compounds our suffering… My father trusted Leonardo when he bought that helicopter but the conclusions of the report into his death show that his trust was fatally misplaced. I hold them wholly responsible for his death.”
The late Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s company, King Power, was earning more than £2.5bn in revenue per year, according to his family’s lawyers. The lawsuit claims “that success was driven by Khun Vichai’s vision, drive, relationships, entrepreneurism, ingenuity and reputation.”
“All of this was lost with his death,” it adds.
The fatal crash took place shortly after the helicopter took off from Leicester’s ground following a 1-1 draw against West Ham on 27 October 2018.
The aircraft landed on a concrete step and four of the five occupants survived the initial impact, but all subsequently died in the fuel fire that engulfed the helicopter within a minute.
The other victims were two of Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s staff, Nursara Suknamai and Kaveporn Punpare, pilot Eric Swaffer and Mr Swaffer’s girlfriend Izabela Roza Lechowicz, a fellow pilot.
Investigators found the pilot’s pedals became disconnected from the tail rotor – resulting in the aircraft making a sharp right turn which was “impossible” to control, before the helicopter spun quickly, approximately five times.
The Air Accidents Investigation Branch described this as “a catastrophic failure” and concluded the pilot was unable to prevent the crash.
The lawsuit alleges the crash was the result of ‘multiple failures’ in Leonardo’s design process. It also alleges that the manufacturer failed to warn customers or regulators about the risk.
Sky News has contacted helicopter manufacturer Leonardo for comment.