O Senador Claude Malhuret denuncia novamente o bufão perigoso instalado em Washington (ouvir o discurso em francês)

O Senador Claude Malhuret denuncia novamente o bufão perigoso instalado em Washington 

 (ouvir o discurso em francês, Paris, 26/03/2026)

https://x.com/yasminalombaert/status/2037231817804173404/video/1

Acabo de ouvir, em francês, o discurso do Senador Claude Malhuret desancando novamente, um ano depois, ô irresponsável dirigente que está destruindo os próprios fundamentos do Ocidente que ele pretende defender.

Um discurso primoroso, realista e irônico ao mesmo tempo, no qual o brilhante Senador desanca o dirigente irresponsável que acelera o declinio do Ocidente, a começar pelo seu próprio país, merecendo ser designado criminoso de guerra pelo TPI e escorraçado de todas as tribunas internacionais.

Paulo Roberto de Almeida 

Listen, if you’re tired of the diplomatic fluff and want someone to actually call out the chaos, you need to hear this. Claude Malhuret just went absolutely scorched-earth in the French Senate, and frankly, it’s a masterclass in truth-telling.

He doesn't hold back on the "madmen" wrecking the global order—slamming putin for his relentless, bloody ego-trip in Ukraine and dragging Trump’s new "circus" of a cabinet for treating foreign policy like a private piggy bank. 

Malhuret is basically the only adult left in the room, cutting through the MAGA noise and the Kremlin’s lies with the kind of sharp, witty clarity we desperately need right now. It’s brutal, it’s honest, and it’s a total must-watch.

Speech by Claude Malhuret regarding the situation in the Near and Middle East:

"Mr. President, Mr. Prime Minister, ladies and gentlemen of the Cabinet, in February 2022, a dangerous madman drunk on grandeur lit a fuse in Ukraine that blew up a powder keg and disrupted the world order. The war was supposed to last a week. It is now entering its fifth year. In February 2026, another dangerous madman lit another fuse in the Near East that once again threatens international balance. Was that war also supposed to last a week? One month later, the whole world is asking: 'What is going to happen?' The simple, short, and precise answer is this: God only knows.

A year ago in this very place, I compared the Trump presidency to the court of Nero. I was wrong; it is a 'Court of Miracles.' An anti-vax former heroin addict as Secretary of Health; a climate skeptic as Secretary of Econology; an alcoholic TV host as Secretary of Defense; a former agent of Qatar as Attorney General; a putin groupie as National Security Advisor. A Turkish proverb says: 'When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king; the palace becomes a circus.'

This 'fine team' decided to create a competitor to the UN. Since his Peace Council has existed, Trump has launched more military strikes than Biden did during his entire term. Every time an internal scandal resurfaces, bombs explode somewhere in the world as a diversion. Bomb more to gain more. There isn't a country where Trump hasn't taken advantage of the situation to enrich himself, never forgetting his family: a private Boeing gifted by Qatar, investments in all Gulf projects or elsewhere, manipulation of stock market prices benefiting a few insiders. A single one of these conflicts of interest would have triggered an immediate impeachment procedure here, but we are not here—we are in MAGA America: the conduct of public affairs at the service of private interests.

After the customs duties, Greenland, the abandonment of Ukraine, the humiliation of allies, the ineffective back-and-forth in Venezuela and so many others, a new senseless adventure begins.

Let me be clearly understood: I am the last to complain about the decapitation of the Mullahs' regime and the first to demand freedom for the Iranian people. But what is the strategy to achieve it? And have the collateral damages, including for the Iranians, been measured? The answer is: there is no strategy, and collateral damages are written off as losses. Just as in January, when Trump called on Iranians to take to the streets, only to leave them to be massacred by the Basij.

After the pretext of an 'imminent' Iranian atomic bomb—contradicted by the Director of American Intelligence herself—and then the argument for regime change, it is Marco Rubio who finally let the cat out of the bag: we went in because we followed Netanyahu. In other words, we have no objective of our own. Trump ignored the warnings of the few who had the courage to tell him what would obviously happen: the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz, the extension of the war to the entire Near East, and finally the global repercussions.

In one last piece of 'fake news' aimed solely at calming oil prices and falling stock markets, he announced that negotiations are underway. The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament denied this within hours. It is the first international negotiation where one of the parties discovers they are negotiating by watching the evening news. 

Tankers are blocked in the Gulf, the Emirates are closing their airspace, influencers on the beach in Dubai are begging to be repatriated, and refineries and oil fields are on fire. 

After assembling the most powerful army in the world, failing to win a war against a medium power, causing oil and gas prices to explode, and delivering nonsensical speeches, the 'golfer of Mar-a-Lago' shamelessly admits to being 'stunned' by the Iranian response—which was perfectly predictable—and calls for help from the allies he was insulting yesterday. And they respond: 'You consulted no one, you have no plan, and we have no reason to follow you blindly into the fog.'

Trump, the only elephant in the world who travels with his own china shop, is left with only two choices, both equally bad: to withdraw piteously, claiming without convincing anyone that he achieved his objectives, or to trigger an escalation with results known in advance since Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan—entrenchment, and in the end, a shameful departure, leaving the field open to the Communists, ISIS, or the Taliban.

The problem for Europe is that you cannot stop a disaster with beautiful phrases, by begging Israel and Hezbollah to put away their weapons and declaring that 'Hormuz is not our war.' It is true, but it only highlights our impotence. In the short term, France's position is the right one: we do not participate in an offensive without a goal, without strategy, and without visibility. But we uphold our international commitments by protecting our allies in the Gulf and the Mediterranean and by being ready to contribute to free navigation in the Strait, because we are the only European country to have maintained operational naval aviation forces. This position must be supported.

But the 27 member states must also start resolving their urgent and serious problems. The wars in Ukraine and the Near East send us a simple and clear message: we can only count on ourselves. De Gaulle understood this first 60 years ago; his message has been forgotten by Europeans, and it is more than time to finally take it into account. Europe has three major challenges: guaranteeing its own security, producing an effective decision-making system, and joining the great technological, cognitive, and financial revolution of the 21st century. Otherwise, the alternative will be simple: vassalisation by our allies or submission to our enemies.

The objective: to become a 'Europe-Military Power' through rearmament, which implies reindustrialisation and massive investment, to become a 'Europe-Political Power' with, among other things, the extension of qualified majority voting and finally, to become a 'Europe-Economic and Commercial Power' by implementing the Draghi and Letta reports. Everyone knows this, but little is happening. 

In 2022, we were told Europe was entering a 'war economy.' Four years later, orders are not up to scale. The great European project, the Single Market, remains far from its 1993 objectives. As for the technological revolution, we are light-years away from setting up the financial instruments essential to catch up with the economies of the U.S. and China.

France occupies a paradoxical place in this issue. It is the European country that best understands the situation, the only one that has maintained an army that is more than symbolic and a deterrent force. 

But today, after 40 years of demagoguery and untenable promises, it is also in great budgetary difficulty.

John Adams, the second U.S. President, said: 'There are two ways to enslave a nation: one is by the sword, the other is by debt.' Despite these difficulties, Mr. Prime Minister, you announced a significant increase in the military programming law budgets and an update of its objectives after having already done so three years ago. This is an effort I wish to commend, but it is also a challenge.

The presidential election campaign will soon begin. The demagoguery of the two extremes, who will constantly call for financial waste and explain that we can 'have our cake and eat it too,' will place a terrible handicap on reasonable candidates. Yet, it is imperative to meet the double challenge of our security and the restoration of our public spending. The crucial question today is: how do we convince our fellow citizens? 

I thank you."