French President Macron, wife Brigitte sue Candace Owens for defamation from transgender claim
The Macrons' 22-count civil lawsuit accusing Owens of defamation and false light alleges that Owens, since March 2024, has "used this false statement" about Brigitte Macron "to promote her independent platform, gain notoriety, and make money."
"Owens disregarded all credible evidence disproving her claim in favor of platforming known conspiracy theorists and proven defamers," the lawsuit filed in Delaware Superior Court says.
"And rather than engage with President and Mrs. Macron's attempts to set the record straight, Owens mocked them and used them as additional fodder for her frenzied fan base," says the suit, which notes that Brigitte Macron bore three children from her first husband.
The complaint says that Owens' allegedly knowingly false statements about the Macrons include claims that they are blood relatives who have committed incest, and that President Macron was chosen to be president as part of a CIA-operated program or "similar mind-control program."
The statements were made in an eight-part podcast, "Becoming Brigitte," and in accompanying posts on the social media site X, the suit says.
"These lies have caused tremendous damage to the Macrons," the suit says. The complaint seeks monetary damages to be determined at trial.
The Macrons are being represented in the suit by the law firm Clare Locke.
Clare Locke in April 2023 with another law firm, obtained a $787.5 million settlement for the voting machine company Dominion Voting System from Fox Corp. and its cable networks, including Fox News, to resolve a defamation suit related to claims about the 2020 presidential election.
"If ever there was a clear-cut case of defamation, this is it," said the firm's attorney Tom Clare, about the lawsuit filed by the Macrons.
The Macrons, in a statement, said, "Because Ms. Owens systematically reaffirmed these falsehoods in response to each of our attorneys' repeated requests for a retraction, we ultimately concluded that referring the matter to a court of law was the only remaining avenue for remedy."
"Ms. Owens' campaign of defamation was plainly designed to harass and cause pain to us and our families and to garner attention and notoriety. We gave her every opportunity to back away from these claims, but she refused," the couple said.
"It is our earnest hope that this lawsuit will set the record straight and end this campaign of defamation once and for all."
A spokesperson for Owens, in a statement to CNBC, said "Candace Owens is not shutting up. This is a foreign government attacking the First Amendment rights of an American independent journalist."
"Candace repeatedly requested an interview with Brigitte Macron," the spokesperson said. "Instead of offering a comment, Brigitte is resorting to trying to bully a reporter into submission."
"In France, politicians can bully journalists, but this is not France. It's America. Candace will address everything on her show today, where she will continue to express her First Amendment rights."
Owens, on July 2, published on her website a letter from Clare Locke to her attorney demanding that Owens "and the entities she controls retract her false and defamatory statements" about the Macrons.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel ‘intends to' take over all of Gaza
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday said his country will forge ahead on its plan to take over all of Gaza, despite widespread opposition — but added that he doesn't 'want to keep it' and pledged to 'hand it over to Arab forces.' 'We intend to [take over all of Gaza] assure our security, remove Hamas there, enable the population to be free of Gaza and to pass it to civilian governance that is not Hamas and not anyone advocating the destruction of Israel,' Netanyahu said in an interview with Fox News. REUTERS The latter distinction would likely mean a country subscribing to Trump's Abraham Accords would be selected by the Jewish state. President Trump has not explicitly given Israel the go ahead to take over the war-torn enclave, Netanyahu said — but the country doesn't need the US' permission to do so. 'He understands it's Israel who's doing the fighting — it's not American soldier,' he said. 'He just says, 'I know Israel will do what it has to do.''
Chicago Tribune
27 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
President Donald Trump's planned 100% computer chip tariff sparks confusion among businesses and trading partners
President Donald Trump's plans for 100% tariffs on computer chips that aren't made in the U.S. are stoking confusion among businesses and trading partners — boosting stocks for leading semiconductor companies while leaving smaller producers scrambling to understand the implications. 'We are still waiting for official guidance,' said Limor Fried, founder and engineer at Adafruit Industries, a small electronics maker in New York. Wall Street drifts as stock markets worldwide take Trump's new tariffs in strideThe chips that go into Adafruit's products come through U.S. sales and distribution companies as well as direct from companies in the Philippines and Taiwan. If those chips aren't exempt, 'it would increase the costs that go into our designs as the semiconductors are the most expensive component in our assemblies,' Fried said. 'For many of these tariffs, we often have to wait until we get a bill to know our exposure, and then we adjust our pricing to account for the increases.' The U.S. imports a relatively small number of chips because most of the foreign-made chips in a device — from an iPhone to a car — were already assembled into a product, or part of a product, before it landed in the country. 'The real question everybody in the industry is asking is whether there will be a component tariff, where the chips in a device would require some sort of separate tariff calculation,' said Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Trump said Wednesday that companies that 'made a commitment to build' in the U.S. would be spared the import tax, even if they are not yet producing those chips in American factories. 'We'll be putting a tariff of approximately 100% on chips and semiconductors,' Trump said in the Oval Office while meeting with Apple CEO Tim Cook. 'But if you're building in the United States of America, there's no charge.' Wall Street investors interpreted that as good news not just for U.S. companies like Intel and Nvidia, but also for the biggest Asian chipmakers like Samsung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company that have been working to build U.S. factories. But it left greater uncertainty for smaller chipmakers in Europe and Asia that have little exposure to the artificial intelligence boom but still make semiconductors inserted into essential products like cars or washing machines. These producers 'probably aren't large enough to get on the map for an exemption and quite probably wouldn't have the kind of excess capital and margins to be able to add investment at a large scale into the United States,' Chorzempa said. It's also not clear how the chip-specific tariffs would apply to trading partners that already made broader deals with Trump — such as agreements with the European Union, Japan and South Korea that tax most goods at 15%. The announcement came more than three months after Trump temporarily exempted most electronics from his administration's most onerous tariffs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of computer chips increased the price of autos and contributed to higher inflation. Chorzempa said chip tariffs could again raise prices by hundreds of dollars per vehicle if the semiconductors inside a car are not exempt. 'There's a chip that allows you to open and close the window,' Chorzempa said. 'There's a chip that is running the entertainment system. There is a chip that's kind of running all the electronics. There are chips, especially in EVs, that are doing power management, all that kind of stuff.' Much of the investment into building U.S. chip factories began with the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act that President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022, providing more than $50 billion to support new computer chip plants, fund research and train workers for the industry. Trump has vocally opposed those financial incentives and taken a different approach, betting that the threat of dramatically higher chip costs would force most companies to open factories domestically, despite the risk that tariffs could squeeze corporate profits and push up prices for electronics.
Los Angeles Times
27 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump moves to shut down NASA missions that measure carbon dioxide and plant health
The Trump administration is moving to shut down two NASA missions that monitor a potent greenhouse gas and plant health, potentially shutting off an important source of data for scientists, policymakers and farmers. President Trump's budget request for fiscal year 2026 includes no money for the Orbiting Carbon Observatories, which can precisely show where carbon dioxide is being emitted and absorbed and how well crops are growing. NASA said in an emailed statement Wednesday that the missions were 'beyond their prime mission' and being terminated 'to align with the President's agenda and budget priorities.' But the missions — a free-flying satellite launched in 2014 and an instrument attached to the International Space Station in 2019 that include technology used in the Hubble Space Telescope — still are more sensitive and accurate than any other systems in the world, operating or planned, and a 'national asset' that should be saved, said David Crisp, a retired NASA scientist who led their development. They helped scientists discover, for example, that the Amazon rain forest emits more carbon dioxide than it absorbs, while boreal forests in Canada, Russia and places where permafrost is melting absorb more than they emit, Crisp said. They also can detect the 'glow' of photosynthesis in plants, which helps monitor drought and predict food shortages that can lead to civil unrest and famine, he said. 'This is really critical,' Crisp said. 'We're learning so much about this rapidly changing planet.' The decision to end the missions is 'extremely shortsighted,' said Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist at the University of Michigan. 'The observations provided by these satellites ... [are] critical for managing growing climate change impacts around the planet, including in the U.S.,' he said. Crisp and others hope Congress will vote to preserve funding for the missions, which are funded through the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30. A bill in the House closely aligns with the president's request and would eliminate the missions, while a Senate version preserves them. But with Congress in recess, it is unclear whether a budget will be adopted before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1. If it doesn't, Congress could adopt a resolution to continue current funding until a budget is passed, though some lawmakers fear the Trump administration could try to delay or withhold that money. Congressional Democrats warned acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy last month that it would be illegal to terminate missions or impound funds already appropriated by Congress. Experts said the administration's move to eliminate funding aligns with other actions to cut or bury climate science. 'The principle seems to be that if we stop measuring climate change it will just disappear from the American consciousness,' said University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann. Crisp and others also are trying to put together a coalition of outside partners — including from Japan and Europe — that could fund and operate the instrument attached to the space station. NASA said it will accept outside proposals through Aug. 29. The free-flying satellite, though, is at risk of being brought down, meaning it would burn up in the atmosphere. National Public Radio first reported that NASA employees were making plans to end the missions. Crisp said advocates are hoping NASA also allows outside control of that satellite, which covers more of the globe, but there are legal hurdles to overcome because it would mean giving control of a U.S. satellite to a group that could include foreign partners. 'We're going out to billionaires. We're going out to foundations,' Crisp said. 'But ... it's a really, really bad idea to try and push it off onto private industry or private individuals or private donors. It just doesn't make sense.' Webber writes for the Associated Press.
