Update on the legal case against Candace Owens.
This is a big story because of the consequences of what podcaster Owens has done.
Well sourced legal opinion. There is very much a strong case that Owens will lose this. She HAS been given enough evidence to show she is wrong. The brother himself is shown in a photograph with her. He also filed the lawsuit in France. He isn't Brigitte. Therefore he was not an older man, who would have been 47 'grooming' a boy who was actually not underage. For this reason she is continuing with a 'reckless disregard for the truth'. It also seems she chose to ignore some of the proof given to her and left it out of her documentary and therefore did not continue with due diligence. If something is presented with 'malice' it means 'reckless disregard' or without due diligence.
Unfortunately if a product is produced and sold for money that also shows the 'disregard' was used for making money. Owens did produce a T shirt expressing her beliefs.
No-one wants to actually see what looks like the way this will go. This is going to be brutal and it looks like Owens can't win this.
 MACRON SUES CANDACE OWENS?! | She's Coming Out Swinging But Might Be COOKED! Lawyers Explain
Watch. Seems the Macrons are not just going to sue Candace Owens but are going after a whole bunch of other podcasters on this issue, and according to this lawyer they have a very solid case. Can't imagine what all these other people said that could get them sued too. People like Joe Rogan, and Clayton Morris from Redacted.
Even beneath this lawyer video, the comments are still the same negative things. The case isn't about the age difference and so on.
Internet Comments for this video. *This is unbelievable that people aren't getting this. Read the comments beneath this video, whatever they are now, and they will still be this same stuff.
".I've watched every episode shes done and NONE of what Barnes is saying makes ANY sense."
So, this person has accepted as factual, that the relationship is incest, and also that they are involved in murder?
We have noted that this case looks like a trap.
In the 'comments section' beneath almost every video on the Macrons, it is full of hateful, judgmental vitriol - which proves how much literal damage Owens' 8 part series has in fact done. These comments are not going to help her. It may be all her supporters who add the final nail to the coffin.
As an aside comment, Candace Owens has a nice enough face but she is a very aggressive, 'beady eyed' rather unpleasant woman. She is difficult to watch or listen to because she is so aggressive.
Brigitte Macron on the other hand is very feminine, and despite being 72, she is sexy. She has the French je ne sais quoi, that American women and most other western women just don't have. Brigitte is an 'empowered woman' while Candace (like Meghan Markle) is not an 'empowered woman', but more of a 'shoot yourself in the foot' type of gal.
Really it is the man Jean Michel who is being accused of these things and Brigitte does not exist.
Beneath the video added here, the comments misunderstand or ignore the video content and again continue with the same hate filled anger. Perhaps if people had not done that, if they said the information had merely 'raised the topic for discussion' then Owens would be in a better position. Hopefully various legal people in the 'alternative opinion' community will be able to help her in some way. The comments from people are definitely not helping her.
Some videos commenting on this say Candace is a journalist and that provides a difference that is not just her opinion - which she has a right to. However, her 'opinion' is not protected if she has been given adequate, reasonable evidence to the contrary. All the photos were provided and other documentary evidence. It could be desputed, but it was reasonable and adequate. Owens chose not to believe any of it. She is convinced Jean Michel has taken Brigitte's identity. Identity theft. Yet surely if Brigitte died there was a funeral?
Also is Owens suggesting that when transgender people get new ID's they are illegally obtained from people who have died? Is that an accusation against the people who arrange new ID's? In addition, she is accusing the private citizen Jean Michel of having lived as someone named 'Veronique'. Owens also comments that it is only the youngest daughter who talks or comments, and that is suspicious to her. However, the youngest daughter is a lawyer.
As for any of this being Owens' opinion. Firstly she has said the information and accusations, or presented these, as fact, not her 'opinion' even if she adds that in from time to time. She presented the whole thing as facts. Secondly she is a self styled, untrained journalist, not a qualified one. She dropped out of college in her first year. She isn't qualified and that could be used against her.
With the particular video of someone giving his own assessment, the male presenter says the 'onus is on the person suing to provide the blood test evidence'.
The answer to that is 'not if the Macrons were setting a trap'. Not if they wanted to see how far Owens would go with her accusations. And that is what Owens did. Emotionally furious that they did not do everything she wanted, she continued and added to the accusations. This lawsuit interaction is on a bit of a higher intellectual level than what appears on the surface.
The particular video says she could have made a Tik Tok video and presented all the proof, to end this. Maybe.
But to us, it looks like the Macrons waited because they intend to go for the maximum in damages.
Owens has been predicatable, basically a 'sitting duck', and very easy to 'read'. Not at all smart or 'pressing buttons' in her 'clever' investigation - with 'smart' and 'pressing buttons' being how her work is interpreted to be by her supporters. She has taken every bait that was dangled before her.
*** I have watched the full video series and did so soon after it was first presented. I found it was extremely difficult to watch because of the lack of journalistic professionalism. That is where I first came in on this story.
Many people in the comments sections, and also Owens herself, make this strange observation,.
" "The fact they are fighting this so hard tells me that Candace Owens is 110% accurate"
They haven't been doing anything but the minimal to provide proof. This leads the way into what could be setting a trap. It looks to me like they can 'read' Candace Owens quite easily. There have been various stories via the news, which it seems Owens has added to her list of accusations. This looks like they were a trap.
However, with someone doing what Owens is doing, it would be expected for them to eventually come out hard in response. There isn't a universe where fighting hard in response to this attack 'proves' Owens is 'telling the truth'. It is about the consequences of her doing what she is doing.
From the Macron's standpoint, they, who are globalists, now have a strong case which could lead to restricting the 'freedom of the press'.
"Brigitte's brother died a few years ago aged 88 years old."
Internet Reply " Funny, she said he was alive. When she was trying to sue the 2 French journalists." (is the implication there that they lied?)
Answer: Brigitte had 2 brothers. Jean Claude died. Jean Michel is still alive. The two 'pseudo journalists' who were sued, then pleaded they had been mistaken but had done it in good faith. That is why the original win was overturned.
Then look at this. The reason the Macrons will win the case.
"How embarrassing for Candace .. the first lady is 10 times better looking than Candace... No comparison."
Internet Reply. "You mean 1st man."
|