- Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
Why is American right-wing commentator Candace Owens so obsessed with French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte?
“I am disgusted by your relationship,” Owens said in January, after the Macrons asked her to stop accusing the French first lady of being a transgender woman. “You make me sick, Brigitte.”
Sure, in our patriarchal world, it’s unusual for a wife to be 24 years older than her husband. But President Trump is also 24 years older than his wife, Melania.
So, seriously, what is the big whoop?
In a YouTube video, Owens called the suit an “obvious and desperate public relations strategy,” and said the first lady is “a very goofy man.”
One answer can be found in the 219-page defamation lawsuit filed Wednesday against Owens by the Macrons in Delaware Superior Court. In exhaustive detail, the lawsuit lays out the preposterous claims made by Owens about the French first couple, subjecting them to “a campaign of global humiliation.”
The law firm representing the Macrons, Clare Locke, is the same outfit that won a massive settlement against Fox News for defaming Dominion Voting Systems in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election.
As the lawsuit recounts, in March 2024, Owens was dismissed by Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire media operation after making a series of antisemitic comments, including repeating the “blood libel” that Jews drink the blood of Christian babies.
In June 2024, she launched her newly independent YouTube channel and, according to the Macron lawsuit, was hungry for attention and “searching for a salacious conspiracy theory to increase viewership.”
Former wrestlers aren’t done accusing their old coach, Rep. Jim Jordan, now chair of the House Judiciary Committee, of failing to help them.
At one point on X, she described her wackadoodle claims about the Macrons as the “biggest scandal that has ever happened in politics in human history.”
Oh, I dunno. As far as political scandals go, I think real ones like Watergate, Iran-Contra and the Jan. 6 insurrection were a teensy bit more impactful than a fantasy about a first lady’s sex change.
So how, exactly, did Owens land on a conspiracy theory focused on the French president and first lady?
According to the Macron lawsuit, in September 2019, Owens became involved in French far-right politics after she was invited to be the keynote speaker at the Convention de la Droite (Convention of the Right) in Paris.
A plan to put able-bodied Americans on Medicaid to work in the fields was tried once before and failed miserably.
Her 15-minute speech was the usual Stephen Miller-esque litany of complaints familiar to Christian nationalists: immigrants, political correctness, secularism and, of course, the “fake news media” are ruining America.
She made spectacularly asinine assertions about police killings of unarmed Black men, claiming that in 2016, “only” 16 unarmed Black men were slain by police and that Black men had a higher chance of being struck by lightning than killed by cops.
She also endeared herself to her audience when she accused Macron of being a weak leader and, horrors, a “globalist.”
In any case, it seems that accusing high-profile women of being transgender has become fashionable on the transphobic far right.
A new generation of conservatives is pushing the same old line: Women should stay home and have babies.
As you may recall, some of this country’s most heinous conspiracy theorists have leveled the same bizarre charge against Michelle Obama, whose husband, the Hawaii-born former President Obama, was repeatedly accused by Trump of not being born in the U.S. These outlandish accusations spring from the impulse to inflict as much political damage as possible.
In early 2025, Owens launched an eight-part series on her YouTube channel called “Becoming Brigitte.” In it, she claimed the French president is gay. That his relationship with Brigitte is incestuous. That they engage in pedophilia and worship a satanic idol called Baphomet.
She has cited a 2021 Daily Mail story as her source, when in fact that piece was a complete debunking of the very conspiracy theories she was promoting.
The Daily Mail traced the origin of the conspiracy theory to a piece published two months earlier in a French far-right newsletter, Faits et Documents (Facts and Documents). The allegations, according to the Daily Mail, were an attempt to damage the 2022 reelection prospects of Macron, who faced two right-wing opponents. Fait et Documents claimed no childhood photographs of Brigitte Macron could be found. But, as the Daily Mail — and the Macron lawsuit — note, there is a newspaper announcement of her 1953 birth, photos of her taking communion at 7, and photos of her first wedding.
Abcarian: RFK Jr. is dismantling trust in vaccines, the crown jewel of American public health
Children around the world will suffer because RFK Jr. substitutes baseless theories and junk science for knowledge about vaccines and health.
How likely are the French first couple to prevail in a defamation lawsuit?
The standard of proof in American courts, especially for people as famous as they are, is very, very high. The Macrons will have to prove that Owens acted with “actual malice,” that she knew what she was saying is false and said it anyway, or that she acted with reckless disregard for whether it was true or not.
The Macrons, according to their lawsuit, sent her three separate retraction demands, explicitly stating that her claims were false, and included evidence such as birth records, marriage records and photographs. They have asked for a jury trial and unspecified damages.
Owens has remained defiant, claiming to her nearly 4.5 million YouTube subscribers that the Macrons are trying to silence her, and that their lawsuit is proof that her allegations are correct. “I am fully prepared to take on this battle,” Owens said. “On behalf of the entire world, I will see you in court.”
Personally, I think she should be nervous.
Robert Barnes, the right-wing attorney who defended the loony conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, agrees.
“Owens told some of the dumbest, obvious lies one can tell,” Barnes wrote Thursday on X. “She has 0% chance of winning in court.”
I can hardly wait.
Bluesky: @rabcarian
Threads: @rabcarian
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- Allegations of targeted smears: The article highlights Owens’ fixation on spreading conspiracy theories, including claims that Brigitte Macron was born male, stole an identity, and that the couple engaged in incestuous and satanic practices. These allegations are framed as deliberate attempts to humiliate the Macrons and boost Owens’ platform[1][2][3].
- Legal strategy and challenges: The lawsuit argues Owens acted with “actual malice,” having rejected retraction requests and evidence (e.g., birth certificates, marriage records) disproving her claims. The Macrons’ legal team, Clare Locke LLP—known for the Dominion Voting Systems case—faces an uphill battle due to the high bar for defamation proof against public figures[1][2][3].
- Broader context of far-right tactics: The article links Owens’ behavior to a pattern of transphobic conspiracy theories, noting similar baseless accusations against figures like Michelle Obama. It traces Owens’ French far-right connections, including her 2019 speech at a Paris conservative convention, where she aligned with anti-immigrant and “globalist” rhetoric[1][3].
Different views on the topic
- Defiance and framing of the lawsuit as validation: Candace Owens has dismissed the suit as a bid to “shut [her] up,” doubling down on her claims. She frames the legal action as evidence of the Macrons’ guilt, urging her audience to “see you in court” while asserting she represents a broader fight against elite corruption[3].
- Free-speech concerns: While not explicitly detailed in the search results, Owens’ rhetoric suggests a defense of free speech, positioning herself as a whistleblower exposing perceived injustices. Supporters might argue the lawsuit stifles criticism of public figures, though the search results provide no direct evidence of this argument[3].
- Doubts about legal efficacy: Right-wing attorney Robert Barnes has speculated Owens has a “0% chance” of winning due to the “obvious lies” in her assertions. This view contrasts with Owens’ confidence, underscoring skepticism about her legal strategy among even some conservative commentators[3].
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recently approved California’s request to extend housing assistance to survivors of the Eaton and Palisades fires. But more than 18 months after those January 2025 fires, survivors are still waiting on an additional $16 billion in federal disaster relief from the federal government, which was revised down earlier this year from nearly $34 billion.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
Modern LA earned its first smoggy nickname 450 years ago, as the “bay of smokes.” At the La Brea tar pits, we take a short walk through a long history with curator Regan Dunn, who explains how and why the first Angelenos would have set fires that filled the broad bowl of LA and foretold the curse of smog.
