The gang of thieves who robbed the Louvre Museum on Sunday and made off with some of France’s most famous crown jewels might end up melting their loot down, an ex-FBI art crime expert said.

Tim Carpenter also suggested the team of robbers behind the “shocking” operation were focused on treasures of immense cultural and historical value.

“This was a targeted heist,” Carpenter told Fox News Digital.

“They knew precisely what they were going for, and they understood the value and the cultural significance of these pieces,” he continued. “They also understood that this was extraordinarily important to the people of France.”

MUSEUM’S ANCIENT BRACELET THEFT JOINS LIST OF OTHER PRICELESS ARTIFACTS STOLEN AND DESTROYED WORLDWIDE

Also “shocking,” Carpenter noted, “is that it was a daytime robbery while the museum was open.”

The Louvre was forced to close its doors following the daring morning theft, which happened in under seven minutes and left police racing to recover the jewels.

The raid, at around 9:30 a.m. local time, targeted the museum’s Apollo Gallery, home to historic treasures linked to Napoleon and Empress Eugénie.

The crew reportedly stole a crown believed to have belonged to Empress Eugénie, Le Parisien reported. 

According to The Associated Press, eight objects were taken, including a sapphire diadem, necklace and single earring from a matching set linked to 19th-century French queens Marie-Amélie and Hortense.

An emerald necklace and earrings from the matching set of Empress Marie-Louise were also reportedly snatched alongside a reliquary brooch, Empress Eugénie’s diadem and her large corsage-bow brooch.

“They could be melted down or pieced out,” Carpenter explained. “They’ll punch stones out of the crowns, and they’ll cut the stones, and they’ll market them individually.”

EGYPTIAN OFFICIALS SCRAMBLE TO RECOVER ANCIENT PAINTING STOLEN FROM ‘CURSED’ TOMB AMID RECENT THEFTS

Thieves executed a daytime heist at the Louvre Museum, stealing French crown jewels. (Thibault Camus/AP)

According to French daily Le Parisien, the thieves, two of whom were disguised as construction workers, entered the museum after parking next to it. They extended a lift to a first-floor window and smashed it open with an angle grinder.

The time “is when the museum is kind of its most chaotic. People are getting settled,” added Carpenter.

“They breached through a window and made this really brazen. These guys are fast and moving quickly with a purpose, and they breach, and they get in there really quickly,” he added.

After the heist, Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez spoke to radio station France Inter and said the thieves “entered from the outside using a basket lift” and “a disc cutter” to slice through glass panes containing precious jewels.

“The investigation has begun, and a detailed list of the stolen items is being compiled,” the ministry also said in a statement. “Beyond their market value, these items have inestimable heritage and historical value.”

THOUSANDS OF PROTESTORS PROMPT WORLD-FAMOUS LANDMARK TO CLOSE ITS DOORS ON TOURISTS

The Louvre is the world’s largest and likely most crowded museum.  (iStock)

“Because it’s a historic building, there are just natural vulnerabilities that occur, and these guys just found one of those and found a way to exploit it,” Carpenter said.

“That is definitely a risk,” he continued. “When you look at a building like the Louvre… there always has to be a balance.”

“I think the local authorities there have a very strong chance of doing a really effective criminal investigation, identifying these perpetrators and hopefully recovering these pieces before they’re lost to us,” concluded Carpenter.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Louvre Museum for comment.

Vladimir Putin is coming to Budapest. At least, that is what the invitation says.

After a lengthy phone call with Donald Trump on Thursday, the leaders of the United States and Russia tentatively agreed to meet in the EU and NATO capital sometime in the near future to discuss a possible end to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Whether that tête-à-tête happens is still unclear, but the news itself sent shockwaves across capitals, as the trip could mark Putin’s first intrusion into the European Union’s territory since early 2020 and further undercut the Western effort to isolate him.

But beyond the geopolitics driving the initiative, and the complex logistics that go into setting up a summit of this magnitude and consequence, one basic question emerges: Can Putin actually enter the European Union?

There are at least two different dimensions to consider.

The EU sanctions

Immediately after Russian troops broke through Ukraine’s borders and marched to Kyiv, the EU rushed to apply a variety of sanctions to weaken the Kremlin’s war machine.

Among the plethora of decisions, member states sanctioned hundreds of high-level Russian officials responsible for planning and overseeing the invasion. The blacklist entailed a prohibition on travel to the bloc and the freezing of personal assets.

Putin and his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, were also targeted, but with a caveat: only their assets were frozen, a symbolic measure given the obscurity around Putin’s wealth. A travel ban was not introduced to maintain a minimum of diplomatic contacts.

According to then-High Representative Josep Borrell, Putin was the third world leader to be personally sanctioned by the bloc, following Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko and then-Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

This means that, on that front, Putin would be allowed to land in Hungary.

However, there is an additional obstacle: the EU has effectively closed its airspace to Russian planes as part of its sweeping sanctions regime.

According to the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the flight prohibition applies to aircraft operated by a Russian air carrier, registered in Russia and owned or chartered by any Russian person or entity, as well as to “non-scheduled” flights that can transport Russian citizens to business meetings or holiday destinations in the EU.

There are several exceptions to the rules, such as emergency landings or humanitarian purposes. Additionally, member states may grant case-by-case derogations.

Last year, Sergei Lavrov travelled to Malta for a meeting of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) that proved highly controversial. The minister was forced to undertake a seven-hour detour to avoid European airspace until he arrived on the island, which permitted him to land due to diplomatic reasons.

By contrast, his spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, who is under a travel ban and an asset freeze, was denied an exemption after several capitals raised objections.

Putin could have two options: either he embarks on a long-winded detour to enter Hungary through the EU candidates in the Western Balkans, or he secures derogations from the EU members along the shorter route: Poland, which could prove tricky, and Slovakia, which would likely be easy.

Another option could entail flying through the Black Sea and Romania, a staunch ally of Kyiv that hosts a multinational NATO contingent.

The European Commission, which oversees the implementation of sanctions, has welcomed “any steps that lead to a just and lasting peace for Ukraine” while refraining from committing to facilitating the prospective summit.

It remains to be seen what levers Trump will exert to ensure the meeting goes ahead and whether this aspect had already been settled when the Budapest option was discussed between the American and Russian presidents.

Putin stepping on European soil again will, by itself, score a victory for the Russian leader after years of isolation and mark a daunting moment for the bloc as its leaders watch on as the Russian and American presidents meet in an EU member that has consistently tried to derail collective support for Ukraine.

But refusing Putin’s travel to Budapest risks being exploited by the Kremlin to underline its narrative that it is the EU itself that seeks confrontation with Russia instead of peace. Kyiv’s position on the summit may help influence the resolution of this controversy.

The ICC arrest warrant

Besides EU sanctions, which are directly enforceable, Putin is under an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court (ICC), based in The Hague.

Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Children’s Rights Commissioner, are accused of being responsible for the deportation and transfer of tens of thousands of Ukrainian children from occupied areas to Russia, which constitutes a war crime.

Neither Russia nor the US is a party to the ICC and therefore does not recognise its jurisdiction. (The Kremlin has issued a warrant for the court’s general prosecutor.)

Meanwhile, all EU countries have signed up to the Rome Statute and are, by default, expected to aid in its global fight against impunity.

Earlier this year, Hungary became the first member of the bloc to announce its intention to withdraw from the court in response to the arrest warrant placed on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which Hungary, like the US, had contested.

The decision was made public shortly after Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán received Netanyahu in Budapest and openly flouted the obligation to detain him.

But Hungary’s withdrawal will not take effect until June 2026, one year after it filed the notification. In the interim period, the country remains bound by the tribunal.

“A withdrawal does not impact ongoing proceedings or any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective,” an ICC spokesperson told Euronews.

“When states have concerns in cooperating with the Court, they may consult the Court in a timely and efficient manner. However, it is not for states to unilaterally determine the soundness of the Court’s legal decisions.”

Critically, the ICC lacks the means to enforce its warrants: it relies exclusively on the goodwill of individual governments. Last year, Mongolia, a party to the ICC, faced European recriminations after it hosted Putin for a state visit without any consequences.

A similar scenario unfolded when Orbán welcomed Netanyahu in April.

“If Putin lands (in Budapest), the arrest should be the logical consequence,” said a senior EU diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“Nobody will be surprised if the Hungarians don’t arrest Putin. It’s not the first time that Hungary violates its (ICC) obligations. So yes, it’s problematic.”

The ICC often runs into the obstacle of diplomatic immunity.

On the one hand, Article 27 of the Rome Statute says the rules apply to all persons “without any distinction based on official capacity”, including heads of state and government. On the other hand, Article 98 says that countries “may not proceed” with a warrant if it breaches their obligation to respect the immunity of a non-party state.

“If a country’s domestic laws say that they cannot arrest a head of state, that a head of state has immunity, then arguably that applies,” Mahmoud Abuwasel, Vice-President of the Hague Institute for International Justice, told Euronews in April.

“However, it’s not up to that particular state to make that determination on its own. It has to consult with the ICC (and) the ICC may find that immunity does not apply for whatever reason.”

France, while defending the tribunal, said it cannot arrest Netanyahu because Israel has never signed up to the Rome Statute. Hungary could now invoke a similar argument. In fact, the country has already promised safe passage for Putin.

Sabrina Carpenter delivered an NSFW performance on the Oct. 18 episode of “Saturday Night Live,” when she sang her “Man’s Best Friend” track “Nobody’s Song” and didn’t self-censor the lyrics “He sure fucked me up” on two occasions.

There was likely some miscommunication with NBC censors, as the profanity wasn’t muted or bleeped either time, causing it to go live uncensored on both the East Coast network broadcast and the Peacock simulcast. Some viewers on the West Coast noted that the broadcast seemed to be on a slight delay and had the audio go silent in their feed during the two F-words.

Carpenter served as both the host and musical guest of the show, and the “Nobody’s Song” performance, with a martial arts stage setup, happened near the end of the show. Earlier in the evening, she sang “Manchild” as her first musical number.

Carpenter recently used some surprise profanity on television during the 2025 VMAs while accepting the Best Album Award, where she said, “This world, as we all know, can be so full of criticism and discrimination and negativity. So to get to be a part of something so often, more than not, that is something that can bring you light, make you smile, make you dance and make you feel like the world is your fucking oyster, I am so grateful, so grateful to do that.”

Off-the-cuff profanity has been much-discussed during “Saturday Night Live” history, with it being an open secret that NBC and creator Lorne Michaels don’t appreciate the show being opened up to potential FCC fines. Hosts like Kristen Stewart, Sam Rockwell and Ariana Grande have all dropped uncensored profanity during their monologues or sketches. Cast members such as Norm Macdonald and Jenny Slate have as well. The rock band the Replacements also dropped an F-bomb while performing in 1986.

Meanwhile, the show has hosted plenty of controversial musical performances, such as NBC removing upside-down American flags from Rage Against the Machine’s amps in 1996 to Ashlee Simpson’s botched vocal performance in 2004.

Carpenter was not the only one to stir controversy by dropping the F-word in a high-profile setting in the last week. President Donald J. Trump used the word on Friday during a live news conference, saying that Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro “doesn’t want to fuck around with the United States.” Rather than shrink back from the rough language, the official White House X account and the administration’s rapid response team account both posted video of the president’s tough talk.