Candace Owens / RedPillBlack / SocialCoroner - Creator of Social Autopsy and unwitting champion of Gamer Gate

  • Thread starter Thread starter HG 400
  • Start date Start date
Turns out that, amidst getting the boot from The Benocide Channel and sperging about Jews, Candunce smoked some crack and came to the conclusion that Brigitte Macron (le President du France's wife) is trans:



Dunno when she put it on TikTok but I found it in a tweet from 14th March 2024:
1738108911555.png

She's planning to drop a transvestigation of Brigitte on the 30th of Jan, after trailing it for longer than a Star Wars film.
1738109247512.png
1738109259105.png
archive
 
  • Lunacy
  • Informative
  • Autistic
Reactions: Smar Mijou, DJ Nerrate, passthejuice and 2 others
mofu mofo said:
Turns out that, amidst getting the boot from The Benocide Channel and sperging about Jews, Candunce smoked some crack and came to the conclusion that Brigitte Macron (le President du France's wife) is trans:

View attachment 6915584

Dunno when she put it on TikTok but I found it in a tweet from 14th March 2024:
View attachment 6915589

She's planning to drop a transvestigation of Brigitte on the 30th of Jan, after trailing it for longer than a Star Wars film.
View attachment 6915612
View attachment 6915615
archive
Click to expand...
What?

I don't know much about this person or these claims, so I did a quick google and found this.

So what? She already sued some people claiming she was a troon and won. Does she need to keep doing this over and over?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ Nerrate
Does this chick really believe in the stupid shit she says or is she just in it for the money? It could be both I suppose.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: The Token Ethnic
Zorgulon said:
Does this chick really believe in the stupid shit she says or is she just in it for the money? It could be both I suppose.
Click to expand...
I've tried to watch her Harvey Weinstein, Macron's wife and the Blake and Ryan gossip videos. But it's such a chore to sit through and she loves the sound of her own voice instead of making a concise video giving the actual dirt that she allegedly dug up on these people. She had a stream yesterday and she was pulling the info on Kanye's health trainer/handler that was already shared on here a while back. She's definitely in it for the money.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Sir Chubbis the Turd, Scarface1, Beanie and 1 other person
Candace has been j-woke for the past 2-3 years now. Right around the time Kanye did. I thought this was common knowledge.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Beanie
I'm starting to think this lady has earned some more attention. She is reminding me of Black Israelities. It would also further my knowledge as to what ways wide-eyed people are strange.


 
  • Like
Reactions: Taco Conspiracy and Marvin
Kipersonapiscesotter said:
That's quite the elaborate story for "There's no evidence"

She is gonna get spanked in court.
Click to expand...

Brigittes other lawsuite failed so I'm not so sure. Have you watched the series? She didn't come up with this out of nowhere. I obviously see everyone dismissing her, which I do understand, but I think it's a little naive. I encourage you to watch it because, despite how you feel about Candace, this series is compelling. And the fact that Brigitte in unable to prove her existence for the first 30 years of her life is extremely weird. The fact that there's no photos of her being pregnant or raising her children is weird. And theres a lot more that's very, very weird.
 
  • Like
  • Optimistic
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin, Smar Mijou, Brian Oblivion and 3 others
blithering nigger-faggot said:
Brigittes other lawsuite failed so I'm not so sure. Have you watched the series? She didn't come up with this out of nowhere. I obviously see everyone dismissing her, which I do understand, but I think it's a little naive. I encourage you to watch it because, despite how you feel about Candace, this series is compelling. And the fact that Brigitte in unable to prove her existence for the first 30 years of her life is extremely weird. The fact that there's no photos of her being pregnant or raising her children is weird. And theres a lot more that's very, very weird.
Click to expand...
You are just repeating her talking points.

Brigitte can confirm her existence for the first 30 years of her life in the form of:

A birth certificate
Childhood photos
Communion record from church
School records
Marriage photo and certificate
Giving birth to 3 children between the ages if 22 and 31, with matching birth certificates.

I have no idea if there are photos of her pregnant. She gave birth in the 70s and 80s, people didn't photo everything. There are no photos of my mother pregnant and she had 4 children.

Merely saying "I don't think that's real" or "I think there should be more photos" isn't evidence. Something solid is needed to challenge that kind of evidence in court.

The whole point of the lawsuit is to show Candace lied. If they did indeed send her that retraction letter and they presented her what they said, she has already lost.

The Macrons will have no problem showing falsity to a US court, because what they said they provided in the retraction and used in the French cases is enough to establish identity under US law. There will be no DNA tests.

In regards to the French cases, there were two of them. The first the Macrons won, with the court ruling the statements false and defamatory. In the second case the court only looked at if the defendants had a right to say what they did, under a genuine belief. The court ruled they did. However,the court didn't overturn the prior ruling on falsity.

Now, Candace has a bigger challenge, because it is much easier to show defamation under US law, because US law has really hashed out this actual malice standard. Namely:

1. Falsity Was Known or Recklessly Disregarded
The defendant must have either:

a. Known the statement was false,
OR

b. Acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
This means the speaker either:

Had direct knowledge the statement was false, or

Had serious doubts about the truth of the statement, but published it anyway.

"Reckless disregard" is not the same as being careless or negligent — it requires a high degree of awareness of probable falsity.

2. Subjective State of Mind Must Be Proven
The plaintiff must prove what was in the defendant’s mind at the time of publication.

This includes evidence of intent, deliberate avoidance of facts, or purposeful distortion.

You know, like saying the Macrons claimed something was in a letter that wasn't claimed. Claiming the Macrons didn't say things when they did. Saying there were 2 photos in a docu book when there were more.

I don't know how accurate, but Robert Barnes claimed to have counted more than 100 such examples of Candace claiming things like this. I myself counted dozens. It's going to be one of the more easier actual malice burdens to meet.

So, no, I'm not being naive. I just understand the law here.

Candace has no first hand witnesses or documents to back up her claims. I believe she will lose on summary judgement on the falsity part and I'd say 50/50 she loses at summary judgement on the actual malice. Judges don't like to do it, but this is so blatant. If she does manage to get it to a jury she is going to need to explain why making dozens upon dozens of material misrepresentation wasn't really actual malice.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin, Imperial Citizen and Trombonista
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back