Macron Defamation Suit: $300K Bet, Trump Tension, and Free Speech Battle
Update: 2025-08-12
Description
Candace Owens BioSnap a weekly updated Biography.
In the past few days, I have been at the center of a legal and media storm over my reporting on the Macrons, doubling down publicly while pushing back on what I describe as political intimidation. According to The Economic Times, I accepted Piers Morgan’s $300,000 charity bet to prove Brigitte Macron is a woman, even as the French president and first lady pursue a 219-page defamation complaint in Delaware alleging I ran a smear campaign and profited from my “trinvestigation” podcast series; I also said Donald Trump privately urged me to drop the topic after Macron’s White House visit, which I declined, a detail sourced to the Independent via ET. Major headline: Piers Morgan’s $300k bet and the Macrons’ sweeping defamation filing.
On my August 7 podcast, I criticized Trump and JD Vance for remaining silent while I face a foreign-initiated lawsuit I frame as a First Amendment challenge, as reported by PrimeTimer. I reinforced that message across media, including an interview with The Spectator’s Americano on August 8, discussing why the Macrons targeted me and my stance on Gaza and Trump’s presidency. PrimeTimer also noted my August 5 appearance on Piers Morgan Uncensored, where we revisited his wager.
There is fresh noise around alleged Russia links. A YouTube news recap on August 11 summarized a Financial Times piece asserting the Macrons examined possible Russian ties in connection with me; I stated FT gave me only two hours to respond and did not run my full statement. This remains contested coverage; treat claims of “possible Russia ties” as unconfirmed pending publication of primary reporting or official corroboration.
I also addressed a legal letter from photographer William Farrington over Epstein hospital photos my team posted, per Sportskeeda’s write-up of my August 7 YouTube video. I questioned the plausibility of the 2019 photo timeline and reiterated my skepticism about the official narrative around Epstein’s death; these are opinions and speculation, not established fact.
For long-term significance, the Macrons’ transatlantic defamation suit and the Piers Morgan $300k bet are the top biographical markers, potentially shaping my brand, legal exposure, and free-speech positioning. Public friction with Trump over his silence adds a consequential intra-right storyline. Everything else, including the FT Russia-angle chatter and the Epstein-photo dispute, is medium-to-low impact unless substantiated by official documents or court developments.
Get the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOta
This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
In the past few days, I have been at the center of a legal and media storm over my reporting on the Macrons, doubling down publicly while pushing back on what I describe as political intimidation. According to The Economic Times, I accepted Piers Morgan’s $300,000 charity bet to prove Brigitte Macron is a woman, even as the French president and first lady pursue a 219-page defamation complaint in Delaware alleging I ran a smear campaign and profited from my “trinvestigation” podcast series; I also said Donald Trump privately urged me to drop the topic after Macron’s White House visit, which I declined, a detail sourced to the Independent via ET. Major headline: Piers Morgan’s $300k bet and the Macrons’ sweeping defamation filing.
On my August 7 podcast, I criticized Trump and JD Vance for remaining silent while I face a foreign-initiated lawsuit I frame as a First Amendment challenge, as reported by PrimeTimer. I reinforced that message across media, including an interview with The Spectator’s Americano on August 8, discussing why the Macrons targeted me and my stance on Gaza and Trump’s presidency. PrimeTimer also noted my August 5 appearance on Piers Morgan Uncensored, where we revisited his wager.
There is fresh noise around alleged Russia links. A YouTube news recap on August 11 summarized a Financial Times piece asserting the Macrons examined possible Russian ties in connection with me; I stated FT gave me only two hours to respond and did not run my full statement. This remains contested coverage; treat claims of “possible Russia ties” as unconfirmed pending publication of primary reporting or official corroboration.
I also addressed a legal letter from photographer William Farrington over Epstein hospital photos my team posted, per Sportskeeda’s write-up of my August 7 YouTube video. I questioned the plausibility of the 2019 photo timeline and reiterated my skepticism about the official narrative around Epstein’s death; these are opinions and speculation, not established fact.
For long-term significance, the Macrons’ transatlantic defamation suit and the Piers Morgan $300k bet are the top biographical markers, potentially shaping my brand, legal exposure, and free-speech positioning. Public friction with Trump over his silence adds a consequential intra-right storyline. Everything else, including the FT Russia-angle chatter and the Epstein-photo dispute, is medium-to-low impact unless substantiated by official documents or court developments.
Get the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOta
This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
Comments
In Channel