FRANCE24 — broadcast
20261105 060000 UTC
382 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:16] Hello everyone and welcome to this edition of "Actuel" dedicated to the
[00:00:20] US midterm elections. The
[00:00:23] midterms promise to be difficult for Donald Trump due to the rising
[00:00:27] cost of living caused by the war in Iran that he started in... February.
[00:00:31] But his political record also includes the methodical dismantling of
[00:00:34] women's rights: first, the termination of voluntary pregnancy, and then his
[00:00:38] support for measures that may reduce the number of women
[00:00:42] who can vote in the United States. So, how are
[00:00:45] women reacting to this policy? Does this rollback
[00:00:49] uh, and that belong to individual of their rights change their vote? To discuss this, I am
[00:00:52] pleased to speak today with Émilie Mitrand. Hello, you are a
[00:00:55] historian and Americanist, professor at the University of
[00:00:59] Toulon. And also with us, Briss Lambert, you are a
[00:01:02] journalist and filmmaker, you notably directed the documentary "Sexe
[00:01:06] faible, l'Amérique en guerre contre ses femmes" (The Weaker Sex, America at War Against its Women) for which you just received
[00:01:10] the Albert Londe award. Congratulations to you and thank you both
[00:01:13] for accepting "Actuel"'s invitation. Émilie, Donald Trump is directly
[00:01:16] attacking women's rights, first with the tightening of access to
[00:01:20] abortion. Will this affect women's votes in
[00:01:24] these midterm elections? Can it even change the outcome of the vote?
[00:01:28] uh, for these, for these... terms, meaning that women's reproductive
[00:01:31] rights, uh, including the right to abortion, are
[00:01:35] not at the forefront of the debates. Briss Lambert, you
[00:01:38] subtitled your film "America at War Against its
[00:01:41] Women." Were the women you met during your
[00:01:44] filming aware, or are they still, aware of the
[00:01:48] attacks against their rights and does it make them
[00:01:51] react?
[00:01:54] Well, yes, of course, they are aware of it because
[00:01:57] they live it in their flesh.
[00:02:00] We documented, in particular, the consequences of these
[00:02:03] anti-abortion laws. We show, for example, that this has led
[00:02:07] to deaths in the most serious cases. We also talk
[00:02:10] about women who have had to keep
[00:02:13] children after rape. So, of course, they
[00:02:17] feel it in their flesh. We focused on specific laws that either
[00:02:20] only concern women or target them overwhelmingly, laws that, for
[00:02:23] example, are only applied in
[00:02:27] which is really almost impossible 90, in 90% of cases, to women. So they feel it. Does it
[00:02:29] make them react? Yes, of course, it makes them react. Some of the people
[00:02:33] we filmed were people who were rather close to Republicans, who were
[00:02:37] also close to Christian movements,
[00:02:40] and who did not particularly support
[00:02:44] with the grief of abortion, and who themselves found themselves in
[00:02:47] complex situations and evolved on this issue, being confronted
[00:02:51] with the difficulties of situations that could be getting
[00:02:55] pregnant when, well, you don't have the means to educate children, or
[00:02:58] when you're not in good conditions to
[00:03:02] have them. So, many have
[00:03:05] been able to evolve, at least among the people we met.
[00:03:09] Then, at the national level, we still see that in
[00:03:13] the previous election, the gender issue was one of the
[00:03:17] inhabitants. main concerns of voters, which is a
[00:03:21] years of little less the case for these midterms. One of the effects of the overturning of Roe v. Wade, which
[00:03:25] protected the right to abortion at the federal level, is
[00:03:29] that maternal and infant deaths have greatly increased in the United States
[00:03:33] since 2022. These are stories that are regularly
[00:03:36] reported by the media. There is notably this death, that of Amber
[00:03:40] Thurman. She died from complications after a medical
[00:03:43] abortion. Briss Lambert, you tell her story in your film. Let's
[00:03:47] watch.
[00:03:51] I want to know what she
[00:03:53] looks like.
[00:04:01] It's when I'm here that I wonder, how, why?
[00:04:05] She was 28
[00:04:12] years old. She was
[00:04:15] full of life.
[00:04:17] Why?
[00:04:19] movement in Georgia's My innocent
[00:04:20] daughter.
[00:04:29] If the doctors had performed an emergency abortion,
[00:04:32] Amber would still be
[00:04:33] alive.
[00:04:37] Briss Lambert, these stories, these cases of women dying in
[00:04:40] atrocious conditions, when these
[00:04:43] doctors, Nobel Peace Prize winners. deaths could have been avoided, deeply affect many in the United States, and
[00:04:47] moreover, statistics show that contrary to what we
[00:04:51] optimism in believe, the majority of the American population is rather in favor of the right to
[00:04:54] abortion.
[00:04:58] Yes, well, that's the
[00:05:00] paradox. There have been several opinion polls conducted that
[00:05:04] show that, roughly speaking, more
[00:05:07] than 60% of Americans are against total
[00:05:10] abortion bans.
[00:05:12] They're not necessarily against limits, but in any case, they are against total
[00:05:16] bans. And this is a paradox we see even in conservative states,
[00:05:19] meaning that these figures are the
[00:05:22] same in Kansas, in Kentucky or in Texas,
[00:05:26] for example. Emilie Mitrand, would you say that resistance
[00:05:30] is organizing against the backlash, or on the contrary, that it's perhaps
[00:05:33] even an accentuation of the
[00:05:36] libertarian movement that says, well, broadly speaking, you haven't looked at what's happening in my
[00:05:40] body, how is it that there's this resistance precisely? Even in conservative
[00:05:43] states.
[00:05:46] Well, individual rights in the United States are paramount, meaning
[00:05:50] that it's very difficult, no matter where you are in the United States,
[00:05:53] to consider that the state can
[00:05:56] effectively regulate rights that are individual and therefore private,
[00:06:02] freedoms. But
[00:06:05] we don't have a thought that develops in a political
[00:06:08] way, since again, in these last elections, the candidates...
[00:06:13] to Congress, whether in the House or the Senate,
[00:06:16] do not bring this subject into
[00:06:19] debate. So we are still in full campaign, and
[00:06:22] each side is trying to rally as many votes as possible, especially those of women. Our
[00:06:26] correspondent in the United States, Pierry Cloran, went to meet them in front of a polling
[00:06:30] station in McAllen, in the conservative state of Texas, to understand what
[00:06:34] matters to them
[00:06:35] politically.
[00:06:39] Here in Texas, we need access to care, quality
[00:06:43] care, especially when it concerns reproduction and our right to
[00:06:45] abortion. It is very important to me. I feel very
[00:06:49] concerned because my husband and I have faced
[00:06:51] it.
[00:06:55] I am really very opposed to abortion. It's in the Bible, there are verses that oppose
[00:06:59] it, but I don't judge or condemn people who have other
[00:07:02] values.
[00:07:05] I feel like we are losing our rights. Women can no longer do
[00:07:09] this or that. We don't want to go back and lose our right
[00:07:14] to vote. I would say I am pro-life. I would like us to protect children, babies in the
[00:07:18] womb, because they are human beings.
[00:07:20] Emilie Mitran, we just heard one of those women who is worried about losing her right to vote.
[00:07:24] Is that a real risk today in the United States?
[00:07:28] No, not exactly. In any case, the right to vote is
[00:07:31] protected by the 19th Amendment. So it's a
[00:07:35] right that is in the Constitution, and
[00:07:37] to remove it would be very complicated, and Trump
[00:07:41] cannot... attack it.
[00:07:44] On the other hand, what he tried to do with his
[00:07:47] "Save America" program was to
[00:07:50] attack, let's say, to restrict the
[00:07:54] conditions of the right to vote. So, for example, for women, it would be to bring
[00:07:58] more identification papers regarding their
[00:08:01] ancestry, especially if they have changed their name because they got married. So let's say that
[00:08:05] it could not suppress women's right to
[00:08:08] vote, but it could complicate it, perhaps delay
[00:08:11] some registrations on electoral rolls, knowing that
[00:08:15] women are traditionally more politically engaged, they
[00:08:18] are more registered on electoral rolls than men, and they
[00:08:22] vote more than men. So, obviously, this kind of
[00:08:25] procedure can have a rather negative
[00:08:29] impact on their political
[00:08:32] and electoral activity as citizens. But we are not
[00:08:36] at the stage where the vote for women will be suppressed or
[00:08:39] can be, in any case. Briss Lambert, the... the
[00:08:42] conservative movement is acting through Donald Trump in the
[00:08:46] United States. What explains the power of this
[00:08:48] movement today?
[00:08:51] So, it's a dynamic that's quite old and that
[00:08:55] became very structured in the 70s and
[00:08:58] 80s, which the Republican party at the same
[00:09:02] time used and maintained for its unifying
[00:09:06] side, meaning that in the United States,
[00:09:08] you have currents, well, we're talking about
[00:09:13] Christian nationalists, we're talking about evangelicals who have a rather conservative
[00:09:17] vision, both politically and from
[00:09:20] a religious point of view.
[00:09:23] And the Republican party played a
[00:09:27] game simply to get, to get their
[00:09:30] votes, and Donald Trump did it a lot. He gave positions to
[00:09:34] people who came from these movements simply
[00:09:38] to win elections. So it's gaining
[00:09:41] influence in the
[00:09:44] making of laws, and so that's what we try to show in the
[00:09:47] film, that there are several laws whose
[00:09:50] origin can be traced
[00:09:54] to religious movements that
[00:09:56] consider that the primary role, if I can
[00:10:00] say, of women revolves around maternity and raising
[00:10:04] children. Obviously, the ban on abortion is one example, but there
[00:10:07] are others. Emilie Mitrand, paradoxically, in these midterms, there's a record
[00:10:11] number of women running. How is
[00:10:13] that explained?
[00:10:15] Uh, I think in the United States there's
[00:10:18] a more natural tendency to
[00:10:22] open up the political field. We are very... uh, open
[00:10:26] at least on representation. It's a real
[00:10:29] subject, no matter the field. Uh, and there, on the Democratic
[00:10:33] side, there are a lot of women, about
[00:10:36] uh, 40% of my memory are
[00:10:39] Democratic candidates, they are female candidates.
[00:10:43] And it's a very good thing. We see in
[00:10:46] many states, uh, also women from
[00:10:50] minority groups, uh, so in Alaska, in Minnesota, we might have
[00:10:54] the first indigenous women, at least from
[00:10:57] the First Nations, indigenous
[00:11:01] nations, accessing a position
[00:11:03] in the Senate or in the House of Representatives. So it's
[00:11:07] very important for voters in the United States
[00:11:11] to take into account the diversity of the country. Of course, there are
[00:11:15] identity groups and fundamentally
[00:11:18] racist ones, but the country was built on this, on
[00:11:21] this notion of a melting pot as it was used a few years ago.
[00:11:25] And it's still something that we put forward,
[00:11:29] uh, including on the diversity of candidates
[00:11:32] and female candidates. And so, these women who
[00:11:35] are today very well represented in the midterms
[00:11:38] of 2026, and in a record way, we will know more
[00:11:42] in any case on Tuesday, November 3rd, at the time of the midterm elections. Thank you both,
[00:11:46] Emilie Mitrand and Briss Lambert, for participating in this
[00:11:49] program, and thank you for watching. We will see you
[00:11:53] very soon on France 24.
[00:12:25] accused after having an abortion after a rape, her
[00:12:28] trial will mark a turning point in the fight for abortion
[00:12:31] rights here in France, and that's what the
[00:12:35] film "L'affaire Marie Claire" tells, with notably Cécile de France. Hello
[00:12:39] Cécile, thank you very much for being with us. So you play Michelle
[00:12:42] Chevalier, Marie Claire Chevalier's mother. This trial took place in
[00:12:46] 1972, it made a strong impression, but we're going
[00:12:50] to refresh memories a bit. Who was
[00:12:53] Marie-Claire Chevalier and what was she accused of at the time? So, as you
[00:12:57] said, she was raped and then she was denounced by her
[00:13:00] rapist himself. You should know that we were in a case
[00:13:04] of absolute social cruelty
[00:13:07] because at the time, poor women were
[00:13:11] condemned to have abortions clandestinely, while rich women could
[00:13:14] go to England or Switzerland, and well, those who didn't have the means
[00:13:17] uh risked their lives, ultimately, because that's what
[00:13:21] clandestine abortion is about. Uh,
[00:13:24] she and her mother and the two other women who helped with that
[00:13:28] clandestine abortion were
[00:14:29] penalty, 5 years in prison for you. Gisèle found in Michel an
[00:14:32] admirable woman, who was a courageous mother, we could
[00:14:36] say, because, well, she had had her first two, she had had Marie
[00:14:39] Claire, then her two daughters, the two men had abandoned her.
[00:14:43] So she was without money, but she was irreproachable.
[00:14:46] She was, uh, morally, she was
[00:14:49] unassailable. And she decides to embark Michel because
[00:14:53] Michel was also a very cultured
[00:14:55] person, very curious, also a little committed, and she
[00:14:59] decides to, to involve her in to carry her through
[00:15:02] this, this political trial. She will bring
[00:15:05] in
[00:15:08] It is both a political trial but also
[00:15:12] philosophical, legal,
[00:15:15] uh, and social as well. So, and she wanted
[00:15:18] to address public opinion beyond the magistrates' heads to
[00:15:21] shake consciences and move society. And that forced
[00:15:25] the magistrates to to modify, to
[00:15:29] modify the law three years later with Simone
[00:15:32] Veil's law, which decriminalized abortion. Yes,
[00:15:36] because what the film shows very well, I think, and which can
[00:15:39] be chilling because, in fact, it wasn't that long ago, is that this
[00:15:43] France of the 1970s was
[00:15:46] extremely divided as to the possibility
[00:15:49] for women to dispose of their bodies. That's also what this
[00:15:53] film wants to show, this trial. Gisèle Halimi wanted
[00:15:56] to make of it, and Michelle was aware of it, the
[00:16:00] disappearance of these 1920 laws that had
[00:16:03] appeared after the First World War to repopulate France.
[00:16:07] So it was an oppressive law and it was
[00:16:10] anachronistic, ultimately, it was misogynistic too, and
[00:16:14] which was an injustice, and
[00:16:17] to have found these women who had the courage and dignity to
[00:16:21] speak of their suffering, of their
[00:16:24] most intimate anger, because it was difficult at the time to
[00:16:27] talk about intimate things like that, of uteruses, of
[00:16:31] bleeding. You have to know that it was absolutely taboo, and so we
[00:16:35] really thank them, and for me it's a way also... to pay homage to all
[00:16:39] these women and to remind that it was a very
[00:16:42] painful struggle. They were stigmatized afterwards too. Marie
[00:16:46] Claire had to change her first name.
[00:16:48] Uh, fortunately, she had a daughter, Jennifer, who
[00:16:52] was kind enough to come see us on set because she thought she
[00:16:56] had become sterile, with that clandestine abortion. So
[00:17:36] character, Michelle Chevalier, as you said, is a humble
[00:17:39] RATP employee. She raises her three daughters alone because her husband
[00:17:43] left without a trace. We really feel she is ready
[00:17:47] to do anything to defend her children. But at first, it's true that we
[00:17:51] feel she doesn't want to make too many waves, as you said, because she is very discreet. How does
[00:17:55] Gisèle Halimi manage to convince her to go for a strategy
[00:17:58] that is extremely risky? She risks 5 years in prison, her children being placed in foster care,
[00:18:04] for her to conceive. Well, it's...
[00:18:07] also the fact that I think Gisèle never made her
[00:18:10] feel inferior. It was okay, she didn't
[00:18:14] have the same access to education as
[00:18:17] Gisèle, who herself paid for it
[00:18:22] her mother's love, who didn't already love her because
[00:18:25] being born a girl was already a curse. They took, they
[00:18:29] took three weeks, I think, to announce her birth because they wanted a
[00:18:32] boy, and moreover, the film really tells
[00:18:36] well why Gisèle became this committed
[00:18:39] woman. It was to explain to the world and to herself
[00:18:42] uh this, this mother who had
[00:18:45] her life stolen and who didn't have access to education. And
[00:18:49] Michelle, who was very, very quick-
[00:18:52] witted, understood in fact, understood the
[00:18:55] mission, the stakes. Yes, she
[00:18:59] understood. They trusted each other. It was
[00:19:02] complicated because there was a betrayal at one point. It's very well
[00:19:05] told in the film.
[00:19:10] So there's sorority, there's
[00:19:14] mutual aid, because in fact all these women did not
[00:19:18] judge each other, they did their best for
[00:19:21] Marie-Claire in their heart and conscience, uh, and
[00:19:25] as best as they could. And that was
[00:19:28] very powerful for us actresses. Uh, I
[00:19:31] think of Florence Loiret Caille and Sarah Suco
[00:19:35] and Saulchetride, we were all...
[00:19:37] four in the dock, and to play these women who
[00:19:41] have who who helped each other, who were really in
[00:19:44] an exemplary solidarity, it was
[00:19:47] very intense for us. So it's true that the name of Gisèle Halimi, well, it carries
[00:19:51] everything along, it's the one that remained the most known after this
[00:19:55] trial, but it was important to you to
[00:19:58] perhaps pay homage or do justice to the role that
[00:20:02] Michelle Chevalier played in this trial, yes, yes.
[00:20:05] It's also the desire of Ivo and
[00:20:07] the directors that there should not be an idealization
[00:20:10] and an idolatry of Gisèle. It's not a
[00:20:14] biopic, it's not that at all, it's
[00:20:17] all these women led by
[00:20:20] the one who decided to be driven by, well,
[00:20:24] by her intelligence, her her hope too, her
[00:20:29] her, and her dream, it's a, it's a dream
[00:20:32] that she, she believed that it would work, and it
[00:20:36] worked, by the way. Yes, even if there were many obstacles, yes, it was
[00:20:40] really a fierce struggle,
[00:20:43] a fierce struggle. It was very well documented.
[00:20:46] I don't know, to reread. I know that the plea of...
[00:20:50] those are the exact words that were used. How did you
[00:20:53] work to put yourself in the shoes of Michelle Chevalier?
[00:20:57] Well, I was lucky enough to be able to rely
[00:21:01] on the testimonies of Gisèle Halimi who talks a lot about Michelle
[00:21:05] Chevalier in her books. And then there is notably
[00:21:08] an interview of Marie Claire uh which was
[00:21:12] filmed, I don't know, in the 2000s perhaps, or the 90s,
[00:21:15] where she talks about her mother, she talks about her journey,
[00:21:19] she talks about... and so I I really was able
[00:21:22] to draw inspiration from documentation and
[00:21:26] and from writings and interviews, so that's quite
[00:21:29] wonderful. After that, it's not a documentary either. Uh,
[00:21:33] there were artistic and dramaturgical choices made
[00:21:36] as well. We are here to tell a historical fact, but we
[00:21:40] are above all here to, well, and
[00:21:43] and to invite the viewer to identify with these women.
[00:21:46] Unfortunately, the regression of abortion rights present in many
[00:21:50] places in the world, the United States, Poland closer to
[00:21:54] us, this story inevitably resonates with our current
[00:21:57] time. Is that also what made you want to accept this
[00:22:01] role, this resonance? Well, it's true that it also gives meaning
[00:22:05] to why make a film on this subject, to recall the
[00:22:08] facts, to recall the arduous journey that was lived in their
[00:22:12] flesh by women who, even if it was a
[00:22:16] victory for women, fell into oblivion,
[00:22:20] were
[00:22:32] and Michelle Chevalier's family. They
[00:22:36] talked about it very little, they didn't talk about it at
[00:22:39] all. Uh, the descendants learned what had
[00:22:43] happened on TV, actually. They weren't proud of it at
[00:22:46] all. It was so painful,
[00:22:50] so traumatizing for her, who was so modest,
[00:22:52] that it's something they wanted to put aside, to keep silent about, yes, really, even though
[00:22:56] they transformed the lives of so many women thanks to their struggle, yes, absolutely. The
[00:23:00] director Lauriane Escafre says she would like this film to speak to 15 to 30
[00:23:04] year olds as well, who probably don't know
[00:23:08] about this trial. Do you also hope it reaches the public? Uh, yes, yes, absolutely. It's true that I am in
[00:23:11] a generation where I see that, well, young people are also engaged and
[00:23:15] also aware of many things. That's strong and
[00:23:19] interesting. And then the generation above who
[00:23:22] experienced everything we talk about in the film. So I have
[00:23:25] both points of view which are really
[00:23:28] interesting, and I think this film brings together these three
[00:23:32] generations and reminds us of what happened in the past.
[00:23:36] history and that we must remember it in the battles to
[00:29:14] It's hard to imagine the scale of the devastation of this city of 200,000
[00:29:20] This people suffers from climate change, five
[00:29:24] drought.
[00:29:29] be a counter offensive.
[00:29:47] It is a total falsification,
[00:29:51] a total theft of your votes.
[00:29:55] It was two years ago, the president of Georgia
[00:29:58] accused the ruling party, the Georgian
[00:30:01] Dream, of having used Russian methods to
[00:30:04] win the legislative elections. Many
[00:30:07] countries, including France, had called for an international inquiry into
[00:30:10] possible irregularities, but the results had been
[00:30:14] maintained. And this election had triggered two vast
[00:30:17] demonstrations which have now become the longest protest
[00:30:22] history. Every week,
[00:30:25] several hundred people gather to protest with a
[00:30:28] mobilization.