French president Macron sues right-wing podcaster over claim France's first lady was born male
The Macrons said in a complaint filed in Delaware Superior Court that Owens has waged a lie-filled "campaign of global humiliation" to promote her podcast and expand her "frenzied" fan base.
These lies included that Brigitte Macron, 72, was born under the name Jean-Michel Trogneux, the actual name of her older brother, the Macrons said.
"Owens has dissected their appearance, their marriage, their friends, their family, and their personal history — twisting it all into a grotesque narrative designed to inflame and degrade," the complaint said.
"The result," the complaint added, "is relentless bullying on a worldwide scale." In her podcast on Wednesday, Owens said, "This lawsuit is littered with factual inaccuracies," and part of an "obvious and desperate public relations strategy" to smear her character.
Owens also said she did not know a lawsuit was coming, though lawyers for both sides had been communicating since January.
A spokesperson for Owens called the lawsuit itself an effort to bully her, after Brigitte Macron rejected Owens' repeated requests for an interview.
"This is a foreign government attacking the First Amendment rights of an American independent journalist," the spokesperson said.
In a joint statement released by their lawyers, the Macrons said they sued after Owens rejected three demands that she retract defamatory statements.
"Ms. Owens's campaign of defamation was plainly designed to harass and cause pain to us and our families and to garner attention and notoriety," the Macrons said. "We gave her every opportunity to back away from these claims, but she refused."
High legal standard
Wednesday's lawsuit is a rare case of a world leader suing for defamation.
US President Donald Trump has also turned to the courts, including in a $10 billion lawsuit accusing The Wall Street Journal of defaming him by claiming he created a lewd birthday greeting for disgraced late financier Jeffrey Epstein in 2003.
The Journal said it would defend against that case and had full confidence in its reporting.
In December, meanwhile, Trump reached a $15 million settlement with Walt Disney-owned ABC over an inaccurate claim that a jury found him liable for rape, rather than sexual assault, in a civil lawsuit.
To prevail in US defamation cases, public figures must show defendants engaged in "actual malice," a tough legal standard requiring proof the defendants knew what they published was false or had reckless disregard for its truth.
Owens has more than 6.9 million followers on X and more than 4.5 million YouTube subscribers.
Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan
The Macrons' lawsuit focuses on the eight-part podcast "Becoming Brigitte," which has more than 2.3 million views on YouTube, and X posts linked to it.
According to the Macrons, the series spread "verifiably false and devastating lies," including that Brigitte Macron stole another person's identity and transitioned to female, and that the Macrons are blood relatives committing incest.
The complaint discusses circumstances under which the Macrons met, when the now 47-year-old president was a high school student and Brigitte was a teacher. It said their relationship "remained within the bounds of the law." According to the complaint, baseless speculation about Brigitte Macron's gender began surfacing in 2021, and the topic has been discussed on popular podcasts hosted by Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan, who have many conservative followers.
In September, Brigitte won a lawsuit in a French court against two women, including a self-described medium, who contributed to spreading rumors about her gender.
An appeals court overturned that decision this month, and Brigitte Macron has appealed to France's highest court.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Korea Herald
11 hours ago
- Korea Herald
Korea, US strike last-minute tariff deal, but tough talks lie ahead
Seoul warns 'devil in the details,' as specifics on $350b investment, digital trade barriers remain unresolved A very last-minute tariff deal between South Korea and the US brought some relief to Asia's fourth-largest economy last week, lowering threatened import duties on Korean products from 25 percent to 15 percent just before the Aug. 1 deadline. However, the deal is widely regarded as a framework, with many specifics yet to be ironed out. There also remain discrepancies between the two sides, particularly in nontariff barriers in the digital and agricultural sectors. These details will need to be resolved through follow-up negotiations. Under the agreement reached in Washington on July 30, Korea was able to avert the initial 25 percent levy in exchange for Seoul's commitment to $350 billion in investments in the US and a $100 billion purchase of American liquefied natural gas and other energy products. Tariffs for Korean cars and auto parts were also dropped from 25 percent to 15 percent. Seoul also received most-favored nation treatment for key sectors like semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, which had been at risk of future tariff hikes. There is no written agreement yet, according to Trade Minister Yeo Han-koo, who was part of the negotiating team, noting that Seoul cannot be fully relieved as either tariff or nontariff pressures could arise at any time. Koo Yun-cheol, deputy prime minister and finance minister, said the real challenges lie ahead: 'As people say, the devil is in the details.' 'We plan to establish a concrete strategy based on the framework established in this agreement and respond proactively in the upcoming detailed negotiation with the US,' Koo said. What's in $350 billion investment One of the major flash points includes specifics of the ambitious investment pledge. Under the agreement, Seoul committed to establishing a $350 billion investment fund, with $150 billion earmarked for the US shipbuilding sector, under a proposal dubbed 'Make America Shipbuilding Great Again.' The remaining $200 billion fund will go toward strategic sectors such as chips, batteries, biotechnology and nuclear energy. But the structure and operation of the investment fund remain unclear, with both countries appearing to have diverging interpretations, raising the potential for disagreements down the road. When revealing the deal in a social media post, Trump said the $350 billion investment from South Korea would be 'owned and controlled by the United States, and selected by myself, as President.' Adding to this, US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick said 90 percent of the profits from the $350 billion investment would be 'going to the American people.' In contrast, Seoul said the fund would primarily consist of loans and loan guarantees, with only a small portion allocated for direct investment. The plan also includes protective measures like purchase guarantees to mitigate risks. In a press briefing on Thursday, Kim Yong-beom, presidential chief of staff for policy, acknowledged that with the fund's structure unspecified ― particularly regarding who will invest, how much and where ― it is difficult to infer the US' exact position. Regarding Lutnick's "90 percent profit" comment, Kim said Seoul interpreted it to mean the profits from the fund would be 'reinvested' in the US, instead of immediately being taken out as dividends, and would remain circulating in the American economy. He added that the idea of the US keeping 90 percent of the profits when the money came from Korea is 'hard to understand in a civilized society.' This 'uncertain' nature of the fund was also a major concern among experts. Yoo Myung-hee, a former trade minister who led free trade agreement renegotiations with the US during Trump's first term, described the fund as unprecedented. 'The investment fund is a path we haven't taken before. There is still uncertainty about how this fund, which hasn't been done in FTAs, trade or bilateral agreements, will operate going forward,' Yoo said at a forum hosted by the Federation of Korean Industries on Tuesday. 'The remaining important task is to carefully flesh out the details in a way that truly benefits both countries.' Lee Jae-min, a professor of law at Seoul National University, echoed that view, saying that "there are many ambiguous parts" to the deal. 'I don't think we've ever seen a trade agreement like this. There are just so many items left for future discussion,' said Lee, noting it was understandable due to the time crunch. 'But what concerns more isn't just the ambiguity, but the fact that the two sides are saying different things.' Lee stressed that follow-up talks need to specify the 'overly broad' concept of investment to determine what qualifies as an investment, and to what extent. The latest agreement sidestepped some of the more contentious topics, including Korea's proposed legislation to regulate online platform companies ― an issue that had been a major point of concern for the US during technical talks ― as well as restrictions on Google's access to high-precision Korean mapping data. But Seoul officials acknowledge that these nontariff barriers could resurface, possibly at the upcoming Korea-US summit expected later this month. The Online Platform Law spearheaded by the ruling Democratic Party of Korea would classify large online platforms as market-dominant operators, empower the Fair Trade Commission to regulate their operations. This would also mean that American tech giants Google and Apple would be subject to stricter regulations in Korea. US companies and lawmakers have been voicing strong opposition to the proposal. Major tech firms have reportedly ramped up lobbying efforts with US legislators and officials, urging them to pressure Korea to shelve the legislation. They argue that the law unfairly targets American firms and constitute a nontariff barrier. The bill is a flagship policy of President Lee Jae Myung's administration and is likely to be enacted given the ruling party's majority in the National Assembly. However, mindful of US sensitivities, the Democratic Party on Monday said it would wait until after the Korea-US summit to decide whether to proceed with the legislation. 'The nontariff barrier issues, including the Online Platform Law, haven't been highlighted much this time, but they will continue to be raised again in the future,' said professor Lee. 'They are long-standing issues that have come up repeatedly during Korea-US talks. Many of these nontariff barriers can be resolved if we proactively explain our position and clear up misunderstandings.' Another contentious issue of Google's push to export Korea's high-precision mapping data was also excluded from the deal, but likely will return in future talks. Washington has been pressuring Seoul to allow Google's access to the data, but Seoul has resisted due to national security concerns. The Korean government was expected to reach a decision on Google's application for the map transfer by Aug. 11, but this deadline will likely be postponed until after the Korea-US summit. Another sensitive topic was whether Korea would further open its market to US agricultural goods, particularly rice and beef. In announcing the deal, Trump said on Truth Social that Korea would be completely 'open to trade' with the US, and accept American products, including agricultural goods. But Korean officials repeatedly ruled out further opening of the rice and beef markets. 'We will not open rice and beef (markets) any further. That is definitive,' presidential chief of staff for policy Kim said during a KBS news program on Sunday. However, he acknowledged that technical discussions might occur, such as talks aimed at simplifying quarantine procedures. Despite the government's efforts to quell concerns, observers say additional US demands cannot be entirely ruled out, considering Washington's strong pressure on Korea to reduce nontariff barriers on agricultural and livestock product.
Korea Herald
15 hours ago
- Korea Herald
Trump's deadline for the Kremlin looms but Putin shows no sign of making concessions
The coming week could mark a pivotal moment in the war between Russia and Ukraine, as US President Donald Trump's deadline for the Kremlin to reach a peace deal approaches — or it could quietly pass without consequence. Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff was expected in Moscow midweek, just before Trump's Friday deadline for the Kremlin to stop the killing or face potentially severe economic penalties from Washington. So far Trump's promises, threats and cajoling have failed to shift the Kremlin's position, and the stubborn diplomatic stalemate remains in place. Meanwhile, Ukraine is losing more territory on the front line, although there is no sign of a looming collapse of its defenses. Witkoff is expected to land in the Russian capital on Wednesday or Thursday, according to Trump, following his trip to Israel and Gaza. 'They would like to see (Witkoff),' Trump said Sunday of the Russians. 'They've asked that he meet so we'll see what happens.' Trump, exasperated that Russian President Vladimir Putin hasn't heeded his calls to stop bombing Ukrainian cities, a week ago moved up his ultimatum to impose additional sanctions on Russia as well as introduce secondary tariffs targeting countries that buy Russian oil, including China and India. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Monday that officials are happy to meet with Trump's envoy. 'We are always glad to see Mr. Witkoff in Moscow,' he said. 'We consider (talks with Witkoff) important, substantive and very useful.' Trump said Sunday that Russia has proven to be 'pretty good at avoiding sanctions.' 'They're wily characters,' he said of the Russians. The Kremlin has insisted that international sanctions imposed since its February 2022 invasion of its neighbor have had a limited impact. Ukraine insists the sanctions are taking their toll on Moscow's war machine and wants Western allies to ramp them up. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Monday urged the US, Europe and other nations to impose stronger secondary sanctions on Moscow's energy, trade and banking sectors. Trump's comments appeared to signal he doesn't have much hope that sanctions will force Putin's hand. The secondary sanctions also complicate Washington's relations with China and India, who stand accused of helping finance Russia's war effort by buying its oil. Since returning to office in January, Trump has found that stopping the war is harder than he perhaps imagined. Senior American officials have warned that the US could walk away from the conflict if peace efforts make no progress. The diplomatic atmosphere has become more heated as Trump's deadline approaches. Putin announced last Friday that Russia's new hypersonic missile, the Oreshnik, has entered service. The Russian leader has hailed its capabilities, saying its multiple warheads that plunge to a target at speeds of up to Mach 10 cannot be intercepted. He claimed that they are so powerful that the use of several of them in one conventional strike could be as devastating as a nuclear attack. Separately, one of Putin's top lieutenants warned that the Ukraine war could nudge Russia and the US into armed conflict. Trump responded to what he called the 'highly provocative statements' by former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev by ordering the repositioning of two US nuclear submarines. Putin has repeated the same message throughout the war: He will only accept a settlement on his terms and will keep fighting until they're met. Russia's relentless pounding of urban areas behind the front line have killed more than 12,000 Ukrainian civilians, according to the UN. It has pushed on with that tactic despite Trump's public calls for it to stop over the past three months. On the 1,000-kilometer front line, Russia's bigger army has made slow and costly progress. It is carrying out a sustained operation to take the eastern city of Pokrovsk, a key logistical hub whose fall could open the way for a deeper drive into Ukraine. Ukraine has developed technology that has allowed it to launch long-range drone attacks deep inside Russia. In its latest strike it hit an oil depot near Russia's Black Sea resort of Sochi, starting a major fire. (AP)
Korea Herald
15 hours ago
- Korea Herald
France and Saudis vow to keep up momentum for 'two-state solution' to Israel-Palestinian conflict
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — After decades of inaction and frozen negotiations, the issue of an independent Palestinian state living in peace with Israel returned to the spotlight at a high-level UN conference — and France and Saudi Arabia, which spearheaded the effort, are determined to keep up the momentum. But hurdles for a two-state solution that would see Israel living side-by-side with an independent Palestine are very high. War in Gaza — a crucial part of a hoped-for Palestinian state — drags on with escalating violence in the West Bank, the other main component. And Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing government vehemently oppose an independent Palestinian state, which the Israeli leader says would be a reward for terrorism after Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attacks against his country. Nonetheless, after eight decades of conflict between Israel and Palestinians, pressure is growing for a two-state solution, as last week's high-level UN conference co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia demonstrated — even if it was boycotted by Israel and its close ally, the US. The French UN ambassador, Jerome Bonnafont, conceded in an Associated Press interview that without a Gaza ceasefire and massive humanitarian aid for over 2 million Palestinians sliding toward famine, 'it will be extremely difficult to move forward to define a new way of administering Gaza as part of Palestine' -- and he said these are priority issues. But the conference demonstrated that a majority of the UN's 193 member nations are 'convinced that there is a possibility of a political solution," he said, and that is "what its follow-up will continue to promote.' About 160 of the UN's 193 member nations participated, 125 spoke in support of a two-state solution (forcing the meeting into an unexpected third day), and between 40 and 50 were represented by a government minister. An independent state of Palestine is recognized by over 145 countries, and the meeting sparked new pledges of recognition by three of the seven members of the powerful Group of Seven — France, United Kingdom and Canada — as well as Malta. A statement by seven others, including Australia, New Zealand, Finland and Portugal, expressed 'positive consideration' of following suit. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farham are determined not to let the spotlight fade. They are planning 'an event' during the annual gathering of world leaders at the General Assembly, which starts Sept. 23, when the new pledges are expected to be officially announced. The conference was notable for being co-chaired by an Arab and Western nation, and for setting up eight working groups with diverse chairs to make proposals on key issues for a two state solution — security for Israel and an independent Palestine, political reforms, legal problems, humanitarian assistance, economic development and Gaza reconstruction, to name some. The result was a seven-page 'New York Declaration.' The French and Saudi foreign ministers sent the declaration, with a lengthy annex of recommendations from the working groups, to all 193 UN members and asked them to endorse it by early September, before the world leaders' gathering. The declaration, which also was endorsed by the EU and Arab League, urges Israel to commit to a Palestinian state, and urges further recognitions as 'an essential and indispensable component of the achievement of the two-state solution.' For the first time, the Arab League's 22 member nations condemned 'the attacks committed by Hamas against civilians' in southern Israel on Oct. 7, and agree that 'Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority.' It sets out a plan to then move to an independent, demilitarized Palestine, including deployment of a UN Security Council-mandated 'temporary international stabilization mission' supported by the Palestinian Authority. It would protect civilians, help build support for a Palestinian state and its security forces, and provide 'security guarantees for Palestine and Israel.' Richard Gowan, the International Crisis Group's UN director, gave French President Emmanuel Macron credit 'for raising the level of ambition for the conference,' and helping make it 'more symbolically significant than many diplomats expected.' The meeting gave weighty states including France, Britain and Canada the opportunity 'to signal their discontent with Israeli policy,' he said, and it gave Palestinians seeking a peaceful road to statehood 'some political ammunition." Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, who hosted a Hamas delegation in Istanbul last week to discuss Gaza's humanitarian crisis and stalled ceasefire talks, noted growing global support for the Palestinians and a Palestinian state — and Israel's increasing isolation. Bonnafont, the French ambassador, had messages for Israel's opponents and Israelis seeking more territory. 'We say to those who are hostile to Israel, the way to peace is certainly not to deny the right of existence to Israel. This is the way to perpetual war,' Bonnafont said. 'And the real way to defend the Palestinians is to give them a state, and the only way to give them a state is a two-state solution — and we have demonstrated concretely that this solution exists and is feasible.'
