By John Q. Hosedrinker 
French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte have initiated a defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens in Delaware, US, due to Owens’ claims that the French first lady was born male. The lawsuit, filed Wednesday, accuses Owens of spreading false and defamatory information on her podcast and social media channels, including the claim that the Macrons are blood relatives and that the French President was installed by a CIA plot. The Macrons’ attorneys stated that they had requested a retraction from Owens, but resorted to legal action after she refused. The suit seeks unspecified damages and requires the Macrons to prove “actual malice” under US law.
Read the original article here
Macrons file defamation suit against US influencer Candace Owens. Well, this is certainly a developing story, and it’s one that’s already generating quite a bit of buzz. It seems Emmanuel Macron, the President of France, and his wife, Brigitte Macron, are taking legal action against the American influencer Candace Owens. The core of the issue? Owens has been repeatedly making some pretty outlandish claims on her podcast and social media channels, particularly the assertion that Brigitte Macron is not a woman.
Now, this isn’t just a casual remark; Owens has doubled down on her beliefs, even staking her “entire professional reputation” on this particular theory. You have to wonder, when someone makes claims this bold, what exactly is their professional reputation worth in the first place? Some might say it’s a negligible amount, maybe even less than the cost of a couple of coffees. But, the important thing is that this situation has led to a direct and powerful response from the highest levels of French government.
The news that Macrons are suing Owens is being greeted with a wide range of reactions, to say the least. Some people seem to be eagerly anticipating the legal proceedings, seeing it as a moment of reckoning for someone who they consider to be spreading misinformation and causing harm. Many seem to believe it’s high time someone held Owens accountable for her words. Some are happy to see this development, expressing a desire to see Owens face consequences for her statements. They are seemingly eager for the details that the discovery phase of the case might reveal. The general consensus seems to be that Owens deserves this lawsuit, seeing her actions as a form of harassment and a complete disregard for the truth.
On the other hand, there’s a segment of the population that views this case as a potential circus, a bizarre episode that has some laughing as they try to comprehend why anyone would devote so much attention to such a claim. Some feel the best way to deal with the likes of Owens is to simply ignore her, but apparently, Macron disagrees. It’s understandable, really. When someone spreads false information, especially about someone of such high public profile, the consequences can be significant.
There are also plenty of people who are skeptical of Owens’ claims and think that it is her obsession with the Macrons that is strange and unsettling. The historical details of their relationship are already quite complicated, with accusations of power imbalance and grooming, and it is questionable why Owens would invent stories when plenty of legitimate critiques could be made. The case could explore the nature of the Macron’s relationship. However, the focus of the legal action will likely be specifically on Owens’s claims about Brigitte Macron’s gender.
The legal case will be interesting, especially regarding the specifics of defamation law and the concept of libel. It is clear that the French government is not taking these claims lightly and is determined to protect Brigitte Macron’s reputation. There’s also the matter of enforcement, which is a tricky question. If the Macrons win the case, how would the judgment be enforced across international borders? It’s a complex issue, with plenty of potential hurdles. It will be interesting to watch the process unfold and learn more about the arguments on both sides.
There are a few, though, who have some very pointed questions. They ask whether Brigitte Macron was practicing Catholicism at the time of her marriages, raising questions about the validity of those unions. They also bring up the question of trans rights in France during that era, wondering if her marriages and tax filings could have been fraudulent if her gender identity was concealed. Questions also abound about Brigitte Macron’s children and who their mother is.
And, of course, there are those who are cynical, and see this as just another instance of an influencer making outlandish claims to generate attention, and, sadly, succeeding. This is not just about the specific allegations against the Macrons. The case could highlight the way that certain influencers, like Owens, have a history of spreading Russian talking points and generating distaste for Russia’s enemies. The overall impression is that these influencers often have a specific agenda to sow disinformation, and this case could expose the methods they employ.
Ultimately, this defamation suit highlights the ongoing debate surrounding freedom of speech, the spread of misinformation, and the way social media can be used to spread false narratives. It’s a sign that public figures are becoming more willing to fight back against attacks on their reputation. Regardless of the outcome, this legal battle will be one to watch, and it could have implications for how influencers operate and how they are held accountable for the things they say.