Earth RESET NEWS

. Best viewed on anything but Google

"Well, being French, I have to try to clarify something. In fact, I expect all Americans to say that Brigitte was Macron's teacher. In fact, no, Brigitte was a literature teacher and Macron was never in her class. On the other hand, she was a leader outside of school hours for a drama club.

This means that she was never his teacher, which is why she was not prosecuted for statutory rape. Her relationship was legal in France."

The lawyers would have established that simple proof before they took on the case, which they intend to win and would look incompetent if they had not checked if Brigitte actually was a man.

Internet Comment : "Where's a photo of Brigitte and her brother TOGETHER .....? or why can't he come out and stand with her bro ?"

This is Brigitte with her brother Jean Michel.

Far-Right Nonsense Broker Faces Defamation Suit from First Lady of France | Candace Owens Analysis

Watch 13 minutes. Dr. Todd Grande. Reasonable summary for a reality based understanding.

Tom Clare, attorney for the Macrons, explains why they sued Candace Owens for defamation

Watch 5 mins.

"They have tried to get Candace Owens to...engage constructively with the truth. And each time she has mocked them and she has repeated and doubled down on her false claims." Tom Clare, the attorney for Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron, explains why they sued Candace Owens for defamation.

Candace Owens Defames The Macrons?

Watch

Candace Owens Risks BIG Lawsuit Over Macron Smears

Watch

With this video the 'very easy way the Macrons can win' does not qualify as being defamatiom. It is not considered defamation to say someone is transgender. Its all the other stuff that makes up the defamation! The Macrons can win with the sentence in the lawsuit stating she misrepresents the ages when the Mcrons met which was 15 and 39 and leagl, Owens keeps making in 14 and 40 which is not legal. After the lawsuit was issued in her followig podcasts she again represented the age of Emmanuelas 14. That then substantiates her story of grooming and pedophilia to a degree, but the age was not 14, and it can be proven, she does have the information on that, it is in the lawsuit, yet she still 'recklesssly disregarded the truth' on that. That is how it works.

There is also so much else they can show she misrepresented the facts on. beneath this vdeo are a great many of the kind of comments that will prove Owens did misrepresent the truth and people fully believed it. She did do it to make people believe hie - and that was for fame and to sell merch and whatever her sstake is in the book on this.

Internet Comments on this videos: "If u wanna discuss the lawsuit (and not embarrass yourself) - READ THE LAWSUIT !!!

a) There were no “photos of a young brigitte” - there was the same 2 ONLY photos that are publicly available- of a small child. There is ZERO photos from then on- until she was a teacher in Emmanuel’s school (where “she” being 40 years old started a sexual affair with a 14 years old child).

b) There is a (digital, not original) newspaper announcement of birth of someone called Brigitte Trogneaux - NOT a birth certificate. (and proves nothing obviously)

c) it is NOT “a fact” she gave birth to any children - there is zero hospital records, zero photos of her pregnant or in a hospital or with babies, or even with small, or teenage children. French women magazines have wanted to publish them (along with interviews of the First Lady) - she has never provided one photo.

You can see the big problem with the sentence in bold. Right there it becomes about a man in drag seeking a pedophile relationship with 'a child'. And that is not true.

The birth announcement doesn't prove much, but they wouldn't have placed a notce in 1953 for the arrival of their sister for nothing. No-one knew all this would happen 70 years later. Besides, she exists, she is Brigitte. For other things, there are enough photos. Why should the public have all their private photos? Or unnecessary details? he 3 children can give Stat Decs or testify under oath that Brigitte is their mum. Plus they and brigitte and the brother Jean Michel all filed the lawsuit they did in France.

Maybe they gave the minimm to let Candace jump right in with her allegations, and hang herself. Most likely they will prove one thing after another with no issue, but they do have to prove they gave enough to her before they filed the lawsuit.

Look, if someone did "year's long research to prove that I am a man" and I'm not, it does not make the research correct! Maybe I wouldn't bother to answer you either.

When French journalists followed up this story they checked out Jean michel, wentto his house in Amiens, knocked n the door nd met him - but were asked to leave.

The journalists simply dropped the story. They did not receive threats on their lives to 'drop' the story, but tht is something that has been said. The truth was to say there was no story because jean michel exists is a man and lives in Amiens. The 'reckless disregard of the trut' was to suggest they had been threatened to stop - which agains paints a veyr different picture of what is happening.

"She got all of her information from journalists who investigated this story for years in France. She'll win."

Response. She didn't. They weren't journalists. There were the two women who aterbeing sued admitted they made a mistake in good faith' and there is Xavier Proussard who took on their 'research'. Other journaists followed up Jean Michel and then dropped it.

"I agree with Candace on this issue."

That's the problem.

".....but damn it boy! She's on to something. I think it's part of the Epstein falls I really do!"

Its a made up story and she only presented what made the story sound plausible. This was her career making story. She had the podcasts, the merch and also a stake in the book sales. She did for the fame and the money.

"Commenting without watching...."

Response. Anyone has the right to free speech comment. The stuff the story id madeup of, does souund wild. If you watch the series its misrepresented information, glossed over facts, facts ommitted, and lots of innuendos.The big problem is that it was enough to make millions of people believe it, and that is very dangerous.

"How do you know it's a lie? Guys, don't invest in the narratives of the elite."

Response. There isn't a narrative of the elite. The problem is an ambitious career seeking fundamentalist pseudo 'journalist' who thought that no-one would challenge her.

Internet Coments.

"Candace did mentioned that there was a sister Brigitte who died and her brother after having a different girl name took the name after his dead sister."

The story is that Jean Michel was known as Veronique in the 70's then actually married a woman named Veronique in 1981 and they had a son in 1981 and divorced in 1987.

The real Brigitte is supposed to have died around the early 80's, hard to know why JM would be Veronique if she died earlier. Brigitte gifted her identity to Jean Michel which is still identity theft but with her blessing, but there is no death reported and no funeral. They kept it all secret. However, JM as Veronique went on a radio programme in 1977 or thereabouts to talk about how he wanted to transist. For a very private person, he chose to talk very publically on radio in 1977 about a very private thing that he is trying to keep hidden.

We might wonder why when the French journalist called round unannounced to JM;s house a few years ago, he was home as a man and as Jean Michel?

"If you paid attention, you would have heard Candace spouting a different story than what she was peddling earlier. First she had spitballed about some outlandish story about a dying sister sacrificing her identity to her brother before she passes. The clip the OP posted has Candace somewhat concluding that the sister didn't die at all.

"Profound differences in the two stories. I'm shocked she didn't spitball about where the sister is now, though per Occam's Razor, which Candace seems to love to hate, there shouldn't be too much of a stretch in the imagination that, yes, the sister is still alive, and that she's Brigitte Macron!"

"Candace who the heck cares. Let the French deal with their own. Stay out of other countries business. Candace acts possessed."

Response : Because this was the career making story that was going to skyrocket Owens to Oprah level fame, and to billionaire status. It is as the lawsuit says, defaming people for personal fame and for money. She does have the T shirt merch but also a heavy interest in Prossaurds book on this apparently.

"It's pretty simple. The lawyer stated that she kept going after receiving evidence that her assertions were total nonsense. Now, that she's received this evidence, which she's still denying, she's creating new theories to try to make her original assertions true. The only people buying this are the ones who love drama."

This next video is not bringing up lots of 'see the doco first' comments. Candace Owens is a very unprofessional "journalist", just by not covering her back shows you that. Her work is sloppy, does not back up with facts but is heavy on innuendo and ading asides. She is not professional, and that is a msjor reason not to rely too heavily on her work.

"First amendment does not nor has it ever protected slander or libel. You would think a “political” expert would know this.'

"Candace asked the Macrons to sue her, she said that she, Candace Owens will file the lawsuit for them and she will pay. What did she expect? Candace went after Brigette brutally. She said Brigette will die a man. She has a tee-shirt with Brigette on it saying man of the year. She kept poking the bear and now the bear is poking back. Candace knows what she is doing!"

rReplies to that comment. "Exactly, she will have them deposed."

"The tshirt thing sounds like a clever idea."

Response. Yes the T shirt is making money out of merchandizing the slander. That is in the lawsuit,

'French woman here ... I'm just mad that my own people believe Candace and take her as a credible source of news. We spend more time asking Brigitte for here karyotype, then we ask Candace for her Journalist degree... cause fun Fact Candace isn't even à Journalist... she dropped out of Uni... People are so uick to believe à woman with a loud mouth, with no Journalistic credentials... Don't get me wrong there's a lot of things that I think are wrong with the Macrons. Brigitte being trans is just not one of them... (cause that wouldn't matter anyway)"

Response. She dropped out of college in the first year. In addition in the interview with either Tucker or the Spectator, she says she read thebook bu Andre Gide when she was at university. Some of us would like that statement said under oath. Really, she read Andre Gide? She also said that in a way which implied she was at university, as if qualified.

"She has apparently talked to her lawyer. He said you don't have a case and it's going to cost you. She also made a 300 thousand dollar bet with Piers Morgan. She knows she's going to be impoverished."

Response. Most legal experts are wondering who her lawyer is because she has done everything to make her case worse. Did she just choose herself to be her lawyer.

" That book was only independently published in February 2025 (6 months ago) and Candice Owen's name is attached to it. The front cover says 'Candace Owens Presents' FFS. Owens who first spoke about this back in 2024 actually helped Xavier Poussard to promote the book in the anglophone world and to her fans. She interviewed him and endorsed the claims which is arguably helped him put together, so in fact that book is part of the reason she's being sued.

Also Candace Owens's visual media has more reach than the book because of her millions of active viewers. With all due respect, and indeed I mean no insult but 40% of American adults are functionally illiterate meaning they can read but they can't understand what they are reading to put it together, so the ones who are likely to believe this convoluted bullshit and spread it are unlikely to read the book which might be why the author isn't names, assuming he isn't.

I don't know the specifics of the case. Since the book only came out this year, Poussard isn't the first to make the claims. Actually Natacha Rey supposedly 'broke the story' (talked bullshit) back in 2021 to a spiritual medium called Amandine Roy. I don't even know how to make it clearer that Candice Owens is behind the Poussard book. How can he break a story which was already broken and indeed can not be broken because it's a lie?"

Response. This seems to be another example of making money out of this most liely, slander.

"Leave these people. All will be revealed. Its actually so shocking that people believe the Macrons."

Thought this video had escaped these ones, but no, we got one here. Why shouldn't we believe the Macrons? The most normal thing is that she is a woman and his wife. But again, the lawsuit states that she is. that is like lying under oath if she isn't.

"I don’t like Candace either but do you guys have any way to debunk her claims???? Y’all are ridiculous… there’s so many other things to not like Candace for but you choose this… Yall have zero evidence lol"

Not true. Owens never presented all the evidence, and she skewed it to support her story. It looks like she didn't think a foreigner and certainly not President would ever sue her. She really didn't believe it when they did. The Macrons called her out.

So she could make millions from it, and make a name. .So everyone not agreeing with Owens is 'ridiculos' to this person commenting. There are photos of Brigitte and her brother Jean Michel. Don't think these people were ever the 'elite'. She was a school teacher and the dauhter of a chocolate maker in a small French city. He is just someone who went on into a banking career but a Rothschild saw potential in him, so presumably was a donor. In 2 years they will be ordinary citizens again, wealthy but ordinary.

The damages are bound to cover all she has got. The question is, can they go for far more than she has got/ It may not mean her husband has to pay, but she could still be sued for a lot. $100,000,000, double that?

Having crackpots with deeply troubling hatreds accusing others of things which are not true is not a good thing.

"You guy's are really slow."

Response. The damages go up again - you see, another diehard believer. She has convinced millions.

Certainly it could be that she is a man, but you would have to be really low IQ to do that, and the lwyers would have ascertained the truth from the outset. They would have asked her, 'are you a man?' because the law firm will not do very well either if that was the reality.

Owens on X. . ... . Rebellion 'Values'. ... . article. + more . ... . Candy Comments (much more to be added.) . ... . President of France Sues Candace Owens ...... Did Candace's husband George Farmer know she was like this when he married her?. ... . 'Project Sitting Duck' '. .....The Macrons are Not the 'Elite''. ... ... Brigitte. Macron ........Macrons v Owens ..continues here. ........ .'Defamation'. ... .... . Video Comments on the Investigation Article.

...

Plant Food Natural Health Contact