Julia Molony: Why the Macrons' lawsuit against the far-right activist who calls Brigitte a man may backfire
As a professional internet edge-lord, Owens is no stranger to a little litigation. 'The life of Candace Owens, it works like this,' she said on her podcast last week. 'I wake up, stretch, I have a cup of coffee, and then I am served with a lawsuit.'
It must have been a surprise, nonetheless, on Wednesday, to see the lawsuit of the day bore the signature of Monsieur and Madame Le President de la Republique.
The Macrons say they are seeking justice against the American commentator and conspiracy theorist. Owens is host of an eight-part documentary series, titled Becoming Brigitte and based on a French book of the same name, in which she claims, among other things, that Brigitte Macron was born male and is guilty of statutory rape of Macron while he was still a student at the school where she taught.
These, say the Macrons, are 'verifiably false and devastating lies'. Owens' interest in the couple represents a sustained 'campaign of global humiliation'. She has repeatedly ignored requests to correct the record, they say, and so, in a fit of piqued Gallic pride, they have launched a legal battle.
Should they have though? They have requested a jury trial, and even gone so far as to pledge to make an appearance in person in the court in Delaware, where the suit was filed. According to the standards of now-unfashionable concepts such as fairness and truth, they arguably have a case.
That said, after the recent slapgate controversy in Vietnam, Brigitte and Emmanuel are not immune to accusations of peddling false narratives themselves.
US courts grant broad discretion to individuals to comment on public officials
But it is unusual, unprecedented, even — this cross-border case between a sitting head of state and their internet troll.
It is folly, was the unspoken subtext behind comments given by legal expert Jane Kirtley.
'I think President Macron is going to have a really difficult time with this libel suit,' said the professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota. 'And the reason for that is really simple.
"Under US law, public officials are required to prove actual malice, knowledge of falsity and reckless disregard for the truth. In [Macron's] lengthy complaint, he has certainly alleged that on the part of this podcaster, but I think he's also probably not giving enough deference to the fact that courts in the United States grant broad discretion to individuals to comment on public officials.'
It raises the question, do the Macrons understand what they are getting themselves into?
Owens called it a 'disaster PR strategy' for the Macrons
Even their legal submission, running to 218 pages, itemising in exhaustive detail their complaints and responding, point-by-point to the accusations, betrays a yawning cultural gap that will probably work against them. It exposes, too, the infinitely unshakable French faith in form-filling and paperwork.
Owens, meanwhile, seems to be relishing all the attention. Dining out on the new international profile the case has brought her, she called it a 'disaster PR strategy' for the Macrons. For her, though, she said it represented an 'irresistible and delicious' opportunity to face France's 'First Lady Man' in the flesh.
'On behalf of the whole world, I will see you in court,' she declared, with gladiatorial flourish, addressing an online auditorium billions strong.
It is tempting to suspect the Macrons simply couldn't resist this opportunity to seize the moral high ground. A battle to defend their reputation and their rights was too tantalising, even if participation in a trial risks tarnishing the dignified, statesmen-like image that centrist European leaders, Macron chief among them, are trying to reinforce as a silent rebuke to the vulgarities of populism.
In their case against Owens, the Macrons seem to imagine themselves as standard bearers for European values
Not least because it serves as a proxy for a broader, epoch-defining ideological clash between European liberalism and the anti-enlightenment neo-conservatism of Trump's America.
Macron himself regularly postures as the poster-boy for the former on the international stage.
He draws on a long tradition of French universalism, and a national self-image cherished in France, as the birthplace of modern liberal democracy.
The country that authored the Declaration of the Rights of Man helped shape, in no small part, contemporary notions of civic rights and individual liberty in America. How affronting, then, for Macron to discover his personal dignity skewered and mounted on the implacable spike of the First Amendment.
Thinking of Macron and his wife rocking up to court in the US, I am reminded of the speech by Francois Hollande at the 67th United Nations General Assembly: 'France wants to set an example, not to teach others a lesson but because it's our history, our message. Setting an example in promoting fundamental freedoms is our battle and a matter of honour for us.'
In their case against Owens, the Macrons seem to imagine themselves as standard bearers for European values, hoping to jog memories in Delaware, America's first state, of a shared philosophical history.
It's a nice idea, but I fear their mission is doomed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Independent
an hour ago
- Irish Independent
What sparked conflict between Cambodia and Thailand – and will it lead to all-out war?
At least 34 people have been killed and more than 200,000 displaced as the countries, both popular tourist destinations, fight over a smattering of contested border temples. Thailand has struck Cambodian targets with F-16 fighter jets in response to what it said were Cambodian rockets fired into four Thai provinces. Today, both leaders will meet for peace talks in Malaysia, even as both sides accused each other of launching fresh artillery strikes across contested areas yesterday. Here's what you need to know about the conflict. Why are Thailand and Cambodia fighting? The disputes boil down to differing interpretations of colonial-era maps drawn more than a century ago by the French − who once colonised Cambodia − and by Siam (modern-day Thailand). The maps had conflicting delineations of the 817km border, particularly around a series of important ancient temples. The ambiguity led to a legal battle at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1962, which ruled that the 11th-century temple Preah Vihear belonged to Cambodia. While a disgruntled Thailand withdrew from the temple itself, it continued to maintain a claim on the surrounding area. But in 2008, tensions flared again when Cambodia sought to register the ancient temple as a Unesco World Heritage Site, prompting strong objections from Thailand. Small skirmishes and a renewed war of words followed, with clashes between the countries killing 20 people and displacing thousands. In 2011, Cambodia returned to the ICJ, which again ruled in its favour. However, the court did not rule on all of the disputed zones and, in turn, Thailand rejected the court's jurisdiction. 'Cambodia won at the ICJ and Thailand has been very unhappy about it ever since,' Phil Robertson, a Bangkok-based analyst and director of Asia Human Rights and Labour Advocates, said. 'There are antiques [in the temples], and there are issues of cross-border trade − there have always been issues. Neither side wants to be seen giving away an inch of territory to the other,' he added. 'It's like political suicide.' What caused the most recent clash? Violence in the region had largely subsided since 2013, but tensions flared again in May after a Cambodian soldier was killed during a skirmish on the border. ADVERTISEMENT Relations have slowly deteriorated since, in what has become a tit-for-tat dispute. Despite both countries saying they had agreed to de-escalate, both sides have amassed troops on the border. Last week, three Thai soldiers were injured, with one losing their foot, when a landmine in a contested area exploded. Thailand accused Cambodia of recently deploying the mines, saying the Russian-made devices were not part of its arsenal. Cambodia denied the 'baseless' accusations, stating that the unexploded ordnance were remnants of 20th-century wars. On Wednesday, five more Thai soldiers were wounded by an explosion, with one losing a leg. In response, Thailand closed all of its northeastern land crossings with Cambodia, withdrew its ambassador from Phnom Penh, and expelled the Cambodian ambassador in Bangkok. Early on Thursday, Cambodia responded in kind, announcing that it had expelled the Thai ambassador and recalled all Cambodian staff from its Bangkok embassy. The country also declared that diplomatic relations with Thailand had been downgraded to the lowest level. Cambodia has also banned Thai movies and TV shows, stopped the import of Thai fuel, fruits and vegetables, and boycotted some of its neighbour's international internet links and power supply. What happened on Thursday? On Thursday morning, clashes broke out along the Thai-Cambodian border, with much of the fighting centred around a 1,000-year-old Khmer-Hindu temple called Prasat Ta Muen Thom. Both sides accused the other of opening fire first. According to reports, shots were heard at around 8.20am from an area about 200 meters east of Prasat Ta Muen Thom. Thai soldiers said they had earlier detected the sound of a drone and spotted six armed Cambodian soldiers. Ongoing clashes have since been reported in at least six locations along the disputed border. According to the Thai army, Cambodia fired two BM-21 rockets at the Thai province of Surin. Thailand, meanwhile, hit back with F-16s. What has happened since? Civilian deaths have since been reported on both sides. Yesterday, Thailand reported a new death of a soldier, bringing the total number of fatalities to 21, mostly civilians. Cambodia said 13 people have been killed. Could this escalate into a full-blown war? Most analysts believe that prolonged conflict is unlikely, as previous exchanges of fire have all dissipated relatively quickly. However, they note that events over the last few months have fanned nationalist sentiment at home, especially in Thailand, where the dispute has had major political ramifications. Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Thailand's prime minister, was suspended after leaked audio of a call with Hun Sen, the Cambodian de facto leader. In the call, Ms Paetongtarn criticised her own military and kowtowed to the Cambodian, calling him 'uncle'. The two families, both political dynasties, had previously been considered close. Now, the scandal threatens the Shinawatra clan's three decades of dominance of Thai politics. It also means that the Thai government fears being seen as weak, according to analysts. 'With Thai soldiers wounded by Cambodian landmines in apparent violation of the Ottawa Treaty, and now with the latest reports of injured Thai civilians and fatalities, the pressure on Thai political as well as military leaders is mounting,' said Tita Sanglee, a Thai-based associate fellow at the ISEAS−Yusof Ishak Institute, a think-tank in Singapore. 'Continued restraint may no longer be viable as it risks escalating a crisis of public trust. So, as things stand, I don't see de-escalation coming soon. The real question is how far the fighting might go,' she said. Mr Robertson added: 'I don't see either side interested in compromising at this point… I think the fight is on. Unless there's some sort of mediation, I don't think either side wants to give any leeway to the other. The Thai government is already facing problems connected to the phone call with Hun Sen… so they can't be seen as weak.' He also said that Mr Sen may also be using the situation to boost his son, who has so far largely struggled to step out of his father's shadow. It may also prove a distraction from a struggling economy at home. 'I think Hun Sen is whipping it up, in part, to create an atmosphere so his son can become a wartime leader,' Mr Robertson said. China, which has influence in both countries, has expressed deep concern about the developments and hopes that both sides will address issues through dialogue and consultations. The foreign spokesperson also said China intends to play a constructive role in promoting peace. Europe, the US or ASEAN − a regional bloc of 11 south-east Asian countries − may also intervene to encourage both sides to de-escalate. What's next? Thai and Cambodian leaders will meet in Malaysia today for talks to end the fighting, a Thai government spokesperson said. It follows pressure from Donald Trump, who suggested he would not move forward with trade agreements with either country if the hostilities continued.
Irish Daily Mirror
4 hours ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Trump's deal with Europe sucks for Ireland and what the EU is importing
Europe is poised to embrace a surge of American vehicles and energy following Brussels securing an eleventh-hour trade agreement with Donald Trump, barely averting a transatlantic trade war. The pact, revealed on Sunday, means the European Union will now encounter a uniform 15 per cent levy on exports to the United States—cutting in half the 30 per cent rate previously threatened by the former president. In return, Mr Trump stated the EU had consented to eliminate tariffs completely on US goods entering the bloc. Nevertheless, in stark contrast to the EU's negotiations with the UK over Brexit, where complex matters such as implementing trade obstacles across the Irish Sea arose, this time Ireland's interests appear to have been relegated to the lower end of the bloc's priorities. How significant is Trump's agreement with Europe? Under the arrangement, the EU will purchase $750bn (£558bn) of energy from the United States and pledge an additional $600bn in investments into the world's largest economy. "We are agreeing that the tariff straight across for automobiles and everything else will be a tariff of 15pc," said Mr Trump, who has consistently advocated for Europe to purchase more American oil and gas. "We have the opening up of all the European countries, which were essentially closed. You were not exactly taking our autos, you weren't exactly taking our agriculture. Now it is open. "It is open for our companies to go in and do a good job." Europe is set to welcome a wave of American cars and energy after Brussels clinched a deal (Image: Getty) Mr Trump stated the agreement would provide Europeans with enhanced access to US pickup trucks and SUVs, with commerce between the two economies now poised to grow. "They [Europe] are going to make a lot of money with this," he said. "I think everybody is. And it is going to bring a lot of unity and friendship." Financial markets have been rattled in recent months by Mr Trump's fluctuating trade policies, with the tariff standoff generating uncertainty for global investors and governments. What does Trump hope to achieve with his Europe trade deal? Ms von der Leyen said the objective of the agreement was to "rebalance" trade flows between the two sides. "The starting point was an imbalance, a surplus on our side and a deficit on the US side, and we wanted to rebalance that," she said. "We wanted to do it in a way that trade goes on between the two of us, across the Atlantic. "The two biggest economies should have good trade flowing: rebalance, but enable trade on both sides, which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, which means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic. That was important to us." The agreement excludes steel and aluminium, which will still face higher tariffs of 50 per cent when exported to the US. British exports of the same materials face a reduced tariff of 25 per cent. Bad for Ireland: drugs firms left out of deal This exclusion could prove a major blow to Ireland, which depends heavily on its pharmaceutical exports. "We have to have them made in the US," Mr Trump declared. "We want them made in the US. Pharmaceuticals are very special. "We can't be in a position where we are relying on other countries. Europe is going to make pharmaceuticals, drugs and everything else for us too, a lot, but we are going to make our own." The Irish government has voiced concerns that looming US tariffs could deal a major blow to the country's pharmaceutical sector, which employs around 45,000 people. Ministers are particularly worried about the impact on multinational drug companies based in Ireland, following signals from Washington that the pharmaceutical industry may be the next target in a broader trade clampdown. While the EU's new trade agreement with Donald Trump excluded pharmaceuticals from immediate tariff hikes, the US has made clear that it still plans to address the sector in separate talks. Claus Vistesen, from Pantheon Macroeconomics, stated that the agreed 15 per cent tariff was less severe than many feared, and unlikely to alarm financial markets-but he warned it would still dent both the EU and US economies. "Trump is finding a middle ground," Mr Vistesen commented. "He is still shooting himself in the foot. US consumers will pay higher prices, and growth in trading partners will be lower than it would have otherwise been."
The Irish Sun
8 hours ago
- The Irish Sun
‘Bailey may have been a lot of things – but he didn't kill Sophie', says ex-lover Jules as she makes bold ‘framed' claim
JULES Thomas believes she knows who killed Sophie Toscan du Plantier — and is adamant it wasn't her ex-lover Ian Bailey. Now she is going to tell all in a new book she is currently writing, as she battles a life-threatening blood 5 Ian Bailey and Jules Thomas, who is set to tell all in her new book Credit: PA:Press Association 5 Sophie Toscan du Plantier was found badly beaten outside her holiday home in Schull, West Cork, in December 1996 Credit: Copyright remains with handout provider 5 Ian Bailey was convicted in absentia by a French court of Sophie's murder Credit: � 2024 PA Media, All Rights Reserved The talented painter told how Sophie's brutal And Jules said she will never forgive the Although she didn't name names, she said the killer is someone who is well connected with the forces of law and order. Jules also believes that person was involved in a relationship with the READ MORE IN IRISH NEWS Her comments come as Sophie's family in Jules said: 'I will tell my side of the story in this book. 'I want to get the truth out there while I am alive. Ian Bailey may have been a lot of things, but he did not kill Sophie. I can tell you now, he didn't have it in him to kill anyone — he couldn't kill a turkey, for God's sake.' Most read in Irish News Jules was Ian's alibi on the night Sophie, 39, was killed. She claims detectives were hoping she would change her story after she and 'NEVER A DANGER' She recalled: 'When the 'Well, here we are all these years later and, guess what? Ian didn't kill me. He has passed on and I am still here. He was never a danger to me or anyone else.' Jules added: 'The Gardai, as far as I am concerned, tried to frame Ian for the murder and, in doing so, ruined both our lives. 'They never seriously looked at any other suspects. 'In this book, I will tell the public what actually went on and put the record straight. 'The Gardai did everything to try and get me to change my story, but the truth is the truth. I kept telling them Ian did not kill Sophie, but they wouldn't listen.' Bailey was arrested twice over the killing but never charged. He was convicted in absentia by a French 5 The house of Sophie Toscan du Plantier, in Cork Credit: News Group Newspapers Ltd 5 New DNA testing is underway in hopes of finding the answer to the mystery Credit: AFP - Getty
