Why are the Macrons suing Candace Owens?

Spectator

2 days ago

As bizarre conspiracy theories go, the rumours about France's First Lady Brigitte Macron take some beating. The stories that have been circulating about her in the murkier corners of the internet generally suggest that she was born a man under the name of Jean-Michel Trogneux, that she and the French President Emmanuel Macron are related in some way, that Brigitte's first marriage (to André-Louis Auzière) was non-existent and, for good measure, that Macron is a CIA plant who was installed into the Élysée Palace through nefarious means.
Up until now, the rumours have largely remained both shadowy and obscure, with few other than the most credulous basement-dwellers attaching either veracity or importance to them. However, the Macrons have now decided to sue the popular and influential podcaster and influencer Candace Owens for defamation in an American court, calling her repetition of the claims 'outlandish, defamatory and far-fetched', and saying that 'Ms Owens' campaign of defamation was plainly designed to harass and cause pain to us and our families and to garner attention and notoriety.' For good measure, it says that Owens 'disregarded all credible evidence disproving her claim in favour of platforming known conspiracy theorists and proven defamers'.
Unsurprisingly, Owens is – no pun intended – cock-a-hoop at the idea of an embarrassing public trial involving her new nemeses. Owens is yet to file a formal defence to the claim but she commented on her Candace podcast last night that 'I find this to be irresistible and delicious' and then began to hint at some of the names of people who might be involved, including none other than the Prince and Princess of Wales and Donald Trump. Owens made yet another potentially defamatory remark about France's first lady – 'You are officially a very goofy man, Brigitte…You definitely have balls' – and then defiantly said: 'On behalf of the entire world, I will see you in court.'
As Owens knows – and as the Macrons should have been made aware – suing for defamation in the United States is fraught with difficulty. The verdict of proof is on the plaintiff, not the defendant, meaning that Brigitte Macron will be faced with the embarrassing and unprecedented situation of having to prove her femininity. Even then, the case could still collapse unless it can be proved beyond a measure of doubt that Owens knew her claims to be false and therefore hurtful. A similar libel case has been overturned in France, with the Paris appeals court dismissing convictions against two women for making similar statements, which has emboldened those who believe (or claim to believe) that they are speaking truth, rather than a conspiracy theory.
It is likely, given the consistency of her arguments, that the podcaster will suggest that she believed Brigitte's allegedly masculine birth to be true, and it will be phenomenally hard for any lawyer to disprove this. No wonder that Owens described this as a 'catastrophic PR strategy', and suggested: 'fire everyone around you who said this was a very good idea for you to be the first sitting first lady of a country to file a lawsuit against a journalist in another country'. She is not wrong. As Macron, knowing that his reputation in France lies somewhere in le caniveau, attempts to spend the final years of his presidency styling himself as an international statesman – hence his high-profile address to [arliament during his recent state visit to Britain, and his bromance with the king – and therefore would like to be seen as an impressive, noteworthy figure.
This story, in all its tawdry and embarrassing details, represents the very opposite of what Macron is trying to achieve. He and his wife are right to be offended by it, and a degree of understandable anger at the outrageous claims is a very human response. However, when the president had his audience with the king, he might have been advised to take on the royal adage of 'never complain, never explain'. Unfortunately, what is now going to take place in a Delaware courtroom is an awful lot of complaining and explaining. Even if the Macrons do emerge triumphant, the reputational damage and resulting humiliation is likely to be so horrendous that it will be hard to see what led them to bother. Whatever happens, Owens has already won.