• Welcome
• Introduction
• A huge political affair
• The research
  and the persons behind it
• The main characters
• The Algeria connection
• Jean-Michel in the army
• The 1977 interview with “Véronique”
• Brigitte the teacher
• The pictures
• The facial recognition
• Brigitte Macron as a woman
• The pedophiles around the Macrons
• Other noteworthy facts
• The court cases
• Update tracker

NINTH CASE: JULY 23, 2025, DELAWARE, USA

EMMANUEL MACRON & BRIGITTE MACRON
vs
CANDACE OWENS

Defamation

• In December, 2024, Candace Owens received a letter from a US law firm on behalf of the Macrons, who seemed to be aware of the fact that she was planning to air a series of podcasts dedicated to the subject of Brigitte Macron being Jean-Michel Trogneux.
• In the long letter, the Macrons repeat the claims of the hagiographies and MSM articles that the official story is the truth, and that the pictures prove this.
• Candace’s legal team replied with the offer to interview Brigitte Macron at the Elysée so she could give her side of the story, in return for not airing the Becoming Brigitte series.
• They also provided a list of some 20 questions, noting that the Candace show is only interested in the truth, and that they are giving the Macrons an opportunity to provide facts and prove that Candace’s claim that Brigitte is in fact Jean-Michel is false.
• She never received an answer, and the first episode of the series, called the Introduction, was aired on January 31, 2025.
• After the Introduction aired, the Macrons sent a second letter to Candace to pressure and threaten her so she would not continue her series about the Macrons.
• Candace refused to be intimidated and the 6 episodes and the epilogue of the Becoming Brigitte series (season 1) were published in February of 2025.
• On July 1, 2025, the Macrons sent another letter to Candace, demanding a retraction of the Becoming Brigitte series, with which she evidently did not comply.
• Later that month, the news of the filing of the case for defamation in the state of Delaware was broken by an article in the Financial Times, before Candace herself had been served with the complaint.
• Candace lives in the state of Tennessee, and that would make it normally impossible to sue her in another state, but the Macrons’ lawyers claim that since Candace’s companies, which are also sued, are registered in Delaware, it is possible for the Macrons to file the case there, which gives their complaint a bigger chance of success.
• Delaware, unlike Tennessee, is a state that always votes Democrat, and the judiciary and jury might therefore logically be antipathetic to Candace, who strongly supported Donald Trump’s presidential campaigns.
  On top of that, this state has recently seen a few defamation cases that were won by the plaintiffs, even though proving defamation, certainly in the case of public figures, is quite a huge task in the US.
• Maud Marian (the lawyer of Amandine Roy) stated in an interview that she had understood that Candace would be requesting the case to be moved from Delaware to a different court.
• As Eric Dupond-Moretti has openly stated that the Brigittegate rumour was a state matter, it might be possible for Candace’s team to ask that the case be dealt with in a federal court instead of a state court, making the case bigger and more political.
• Note that the Macrons have said they would come to the US to testify in person if needed – a very strange and bold statement, as nobody deigns to turn up in court in France.
• The 200-page accusation was made public by Candace Owens herself and can be found here.
• It contains very obvious false claims (like Candace having UK nationality), and makes very strange claims about Brigitte Macron’s early life, the reporting on which has so far already been very inconsistent, and it of course provides no proofs to back up the claims.
• The main ‘evidence’ of the whole complaint is an endless “because we say so”. Showing a picture obviously proves nothing unless we can ascertain beyond any doubt whether the picture is genuine and what exactly it shows.
• One thing is certain: this lawsuit has drawn immense attention to the issue, and will make loads more people look into the reality of the matter. The Streisand Effect will come to haunt Brigitte Macron.
• What should be noted clearly in this case is that Jean-Michel Trogneux, for once, isn’t suing her. Strange. He was in the main case as a plaintiff, so why not here? Would it be harder to pretend he exists as a separate human being in the US than in France?
  Also, as he is not a public figure, the defamation laws in the US are much less strict for him than for Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron, so he would have a much much bigger chance of winning…
  But would “le Petit Gros” have been able to stand up to the inevitable scrutiny he would be going through if he had been added to this court case?
• In September 2025, a second season of Becoming Brigitte started airing on Candace’s channels, but was interrupted by the assassination of her friend Charlie Kirk and her subsequent investigation into that crime.
• On September 12, 2025, the judicial website of the State of Delaware showed that the Candace team has filed a motion for dismissal of the case in the state of Delaware, in order to force the trial to go to the state of Tennessee or the federal level.
  It is still remarkable that she filed for dismissal, as she had repeatedly said that she wants this trial to go on, as it would give her the opportunity to go for “discovery”, a phase in the trial that allows the parties to demand proof of claims, often forcing the publication of hitherto hidden documents.
• On November 19th, 2025, Candace aired an episode of her podcast that dealt with the now notorious “Egyptian planes” linked to the assassination of Charlie Kirk. In the episode, she read out an email in which the fact that the planes very regularly have a lay-over at Wilmington, Delaware was linked to a shared office of the US Secret Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the FBI. It was quickly pointed out that this address is the exact same location where the law firm is located that defends her in the defamation lawsuit filed by the Macrons.
  Two days later, Candace briefly clarified in her podcast that Delaware state laws require her to be represented by a Delaware law firm. Apparently, Candace’s lawyer (known as “Noah”), who is not from Delaware, therefore teamed up with the law firm that happens to be housed in the same building as this shared FBI/USS/DEA office relevant to the Charlie Kirk case.
• On November 22, 2025, shortly after midnight local time, Candace tweeted that on November 19th, she had been contacted by a “high-ranking employee of the French government”, whose proximity to the Macrons she was able to establish. The person informed her that the Macrons would have organised and greenlit her assassination, and that Xavier Poussard’s life was in danger as well.
• The hearing for the dismissal is scheduled for April 28, 2026. Pressibus questions this very late date, as the same “kicking the can down the road” strategy seems to be used in the French court cases, with the verdict of the Fourth Case not being provided in print.