reSee.it - Related Post Feed

Posted - July 18, 2023 at 6:42 AM

Saved - December 4, 2023 at 5:46 PM

@JohannFakra - Johann Fakra

Comment #macron a volé l'élection de 2017 !!! Il n'avait obtenu que 1,59%, aux deux tiers des dépouillements... A faire tourner bien comme il faut ça...

Video Transcript AI Summary

Here are the partial results from the first round of the French presidential election. Le Pen and Mélenchon were in the lead, followed by Jean Lassalle. Five candidates, Cheminade, Hamon, Poutou, Assino, and Dupont-Aignan, had around 5% of the votes. Fillon and Macron gained votes from other candidates, with Fillon receiving 6,571,562 more votes and Macron receiving 8,213,343 more votes. These partial results represent over 70% of the total votes. The results show a desire for change, as the traditional parties, PS and UMP, received less than 10% of the votes. Jean Lassalle's third-place finish symbolizes this desire for renewal. Emmanuel Macron's low support reflects a rejection of the establishment. The Mélenchon-Le Pen duel reflects pre-election trends. Finally, the third-place finish of Jean Lassalle is significant, as it represents a rejection of the traditional parties.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Voici donc mesdames, mesdemoiselles, messieurs, le tableau récapitulatif des résultats partiels issus des premiers dépouillements publiés par le journal sud-ouest à vingt heures quarante-cinq, la Nouvelle-Aquitaine, le centre-Val de Loire, l'Occitanie, PACA, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes et Bourgogne-Franche-Comté. Et le bouquet final, les résultats partiels issus de plus de soixante pour cent des dépouillements pour la France entière. Les résultats partiels des dépouillements sur la France entière concernent plus de vingt-trois millions de votants sur un total de trente-sept millions, soit plus de soixante pour cent du corps électoral votant pour ce premier tour. La tendance sur la France entière est la même que pour les 6 autres régions. Le ticket Le Pen Mélenchon était largement en tête, le centriste Jean Lassalle était le troisième homme autour de dix-neuf pour cent, révélation surprise de ce scrutin, et et un groupe de cinq candidats étaient autour de cinq pour cent. Le club des cinq appelons-le comme ça, Cheminade, Hamon, Poutou, Assino et Dupont-Aignan. Enfin le trio de queue sans jeu de mots ferme la marche autour de deux pour cent. La comparaison des résultats définitifs pour la France et des résultats partiels diffusés à vingt heures quarante-cinq, démontre aussi un transfert de voix de huit candidats vers essentiellement Fillon et Macron. Le transfert porte donc sur l'échelle de la France à plusieurs millions de voix. 6 millions cinq cent soixante et onze mille cinq cent soixante-deux voix en plus pour Fillon et huit millions deux cent treize mille trois cent quarante-trois voix en plus Emmanuel Macron sur la France entière à vingt heures quarante-cinq. Les résultats partiels diffusés à vingt heures quarante-cinq sur sur le site du journal sud-ouest concerne donc un total de vingt-trois millions deux cent vingt-deux mille 6 cent soixante-et-un votants. Pour un total final officiel premier tour de trente-sept millions trois-mille-sept-cent-vingt-huit votants. Les chiffres des dépouillements publiés par le site de Sud-Ouest à vingt heures quarante-cinq ne souffrent aucune contestation quant à leur authenticité. La logique des transferts de voix est incontestable puisqu'elle est mathématique. Ces transferts de voix ont bénéficié à deux candidats, Macron et Fillon. Des résultats du premier tour de l'élection présidentielle deux-mille-dix-sept ont donc été falsifiés. Comme ces résultats partiels publiés par le journal sud ouest à vingt heures quarante-cinq concerne un nombre significatif de votants, plus de soixante-dix pour cent des bulletins exprimés, nous pouvons faire plusieurs remarques quant au désir que les français ont exprimé lors de ce premier tour de l'élection présidentielle deux mille dix-sept. La volonté d'en finir avec le double parti unique qui domine la France depuis quarante ans. Le PS et l'UMP ne dépassent pas les dix pour cent avec trois candidats issus de leurs rangs, soit une moyenne de trois virgule trente-trois pour cent par candidat. Le deuxième point qui émerge de ces vrais résultats, c'est le souhait d'un renouvellement. Ce renouvellement passe par le score de Jean Lassalle ainsi que ce qu'on appelle, je l'ai appelé le club des cinq, c'est-à-dire les cinq candidats qui font autour de cinq pour cent et ces cinq candidats et Jean Lassalle réunissent à eux 6 plus de quarante pour cent des suffrages. Donc il y a vraiment le souhait de tourner une page en France. Le troisième point, c'est le rejet total de Emmanuel Macron, qui finit bon dernier si on se fie au résultat sur la France entière. Il est même probable, puisque le dépouillement ne lui était pas plus favorable dans les grandes villes qu'il soit encore plus bas au final, donc en dessous de un virgule cinq pour cent. C'est un échec absolu pour l'oligarchie qui ne fait que creuser le fossé qui la sépare du reste de la France ou qui la sépare de la France tout simplement. Quatrième point, le duel Mélenchon-Le Pen reflétait bien les tendances d'avant ce premier tour. Enfin, le dernier point, et c'est ça, c'est peut-être le point le plus important, c'est la troisième place de Jean Lassalle. Cette troisième place de ce de cet homme-là est tout un symbole fillon officiellement soutenu par l'ump et Macron officieusement soutenu par le PS ont réuni à eux deux moins de cinq pour cent des suffrages à l'issue des dépouillements partiels. Et à l'issue de ces élections, l'UMP a fusionné et s'appelle en marche, la république en marche. Un ancien de l'UMP est devenu premier ministre, Edouard Philippe, et un ancien du PS, Emmanuel Macron, est devenu président de la République. À voter.

@zoesagan — Zoé Sagan

Posted - August 12, 2023 at 2:50 PM

Saved - August 12, 2023 at 10:38 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

In France, sharing a film featuring a Rothschild family member expressing themselves openly renders your post invisible. Thierry Breton's maneuvers, an employee of Bernard Arnault, will soon lead to censorship in Europe. Luckily, a secret backup plan exists, unknown to Thierry and Bernard, who are only troubled by their new castle's Wi-Fi.

@zoesagan - Zoé Sagan

Voilà où nous en sommes en France. Dès que vous publiez un tweet avec un film montrant simplement l’un des membres de la famille Rothschild qui s’exprime ouvertement et en toute détente votre publication devient mécaniquement invisible. Les manœuvres de Thierry Breton, l’un des employés de Bernard Arnault, vont aboutir à faire censurer @X en Europe dès le 25 Août. Heureusement il existe déjà un plan b que ne connaît pas encore Thierry ni Bernard 1er qui n’ont que des problèmes de wifi dans leur nouveau château respectif.

@SierraTango74 — Tangosierra74

Posted - August 13, 2023 at 8:23 PM

Saved - August 13, 2023 at 11:30 PM

@SierraTango74 - Tangosierra74

Affaire #JeanMichelTrogneux suite #NatachaRey poursuivie pour ses déclarations sur le passé opaque de #BrigitteMacron a demandé a sa juge d'instruction que soient entendus des policiers sur le passé d'un #Trogneux prostitué et surnommé il y a quelques décennies "coupe-zizi"

Video Transcript AI Summary

I request the following actions: filing a motion to nullify the complaint and indictment due to the omission of Article 32, paragraph 3 of the press law and the violation of Article 51, last paragraph of the press law. Ordering a DNA test for Mrs. Trogneux-Brigitte and Mr. Trogneux-Jean-Michel to shed light on this mysterious case. Arranging a confrontation between Mrs. Trogneux, Brigitte, and myself. Hearing former intelligence director Claude Bardon, former commissioner Lucien Aimé Blanc, and inspector Claude Paul, who worked in the vice squad and can confirm that the person known as Trogneux frequented Pastor Doucet's establishment, referred to as Kougzi. Also, confirming that Trogneux was associated with Madame Claude's girls, including the late transsexual Alexandre Giraud, also known as Alexandra or Marleau, who passed away in 1992. Former ministers who frequented 32 Rue de Boulainvilliers, some of whom are still alive, may also remember. I confirm this request by registered mail. Thank you for not issuing the settlement order until the decision of the higher chamber of instruction on the nullity request. I hope you receive this well. In the meantime, please accept my respectful and distinguished greetings.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Je vous demande donc d'effectuer les actes suivants, de saisir la grande chambre de l'instruction d'une demande en nullité de la plainte et du réquisitoire pour omission du visa de l'article trente-deux alinéa trois de la loi sur la presse et pour violation de l'article cinquante-et-un un dernier alinéa de la loi sur la presse. D'ordonner une expertise ADN de madame Trogneux-Brigitte et de monsieur Trogneux-Jean-Michel et ce afin de faire toute la lumière sur cette ténébreuse affaire. D'organiser une confrontation entre madame Trogneux, Brigitte et moi-même. D'entendre l'ancien directeur des renseignements généraux Claude Bardon, l'ancien commissaire Lucien Aimé Blanc. Alors je vais après entre temps qu'il était mort il y a un an ou deux, mais c'est pas grave voilà. Et et l'inspecteur et l'inspecteur Claude Paul qui ont travaillé à la brigade mondaine qui confirmeront que travestie du nom de Trogneux, ce prostituant fréquentait bien l'officine du pasteur Doucet connu dans les fichiers de cette brigade sous le costaud briquet de Kougzi. Et encore que le dit trogneux faisait faisait partie des filles de madame Claude pour laquelle travaillait aussi à l'époque le transsexuel Alexandre Giraud dit Alexandra dit aussi qui marleau décédé du qui date en mille-neuf-cent-quatre-vingt-douze. Les anciens ministres fréquentant assidûment le trente-deux rue de Boulainvilliers dont certains sont encore en vie s'en souviennent aussi probablement. Je vous confirme par courrier recommandé cette demande d'acte. Je vous remercie de ne pas délivrer l'ordonnance de règlement dans l'attente de la décision de la grande chambre de l'instruction sur la requête en nullité. Je vous souhaite une bonne réception de la présente. Dans cette attente, veuillez agréer madame la juge d'instruction, l'expression de mes salutations respectueuses et distinguées.

@zoesagan — Zoé Sagan

Posted - September 1, 2023 at 11:55 AM

Saved - October 20, 2023 at 5:07 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The new TV season starts strong as journalist @dominiquejamet speaks on @CNEWS about what many French people think about the hidden lives of Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron. Pascal Praud tries to silence him, revealing more. A promising start.

@zoesagan - Zoé Sagan

La rentrée télé commence fort. Quand l'excellent journaliste @dominiquejamet dit sur @CNEWS ce que des millions de français pensent sur la vie cachée de Brigitte et Emmanuel Macron, la franc-maçonnerie, euh pardon, Pascal Praud tente immédiatement de le faire taire. Un aveu de plus. C’est un bon début.

@zoesagan — Zoé Sagan

Posted - September 7, 2023 at 1:36 PM

Saved - October 15, 2023 at 11:07 AM

@zoesagan - Zoé Sagan

J’ai une information (indéboulonnable et indémontable) venant des douanes françaises qui va torpiller toutes les biographies d’Emmanuel et Brigitte Macron. Tout le travail « journalistique » va partir en fumée. D’un coup sec. En un seul tweet.

@zoesagan - Zoé Sagan

La semaine prochaine je vais publier ici une information qui va changer radicalement la Ve République. Ni plus. Ni moins.

@Gaulois_00 — ⚔️ Gaulois

Posted - October 6, 2023 at 8:01 AM

Saved - October 6, 2023 at 9:52 AM

@Gaulois_00 - ⚔️ Gaulois

#Macron ne savait pas que la dame n’était pas une figurante payée mais une femme du peuple….

@jol_vil — Jol Vil

Posted - October 7, 2023 at 1:57 PM

Saved - November 6, 2023 at 7:46 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

In a surprising revelation, it has been discovered that the witness at Brigitte Macron's first marriage was none other than Georges COSTES, the former head of the RG in Algeria. COSTES was known to be associated with influential figures like senator Henri BORGEAUD. BORGEAUD's granddaughter, Martine BORGEAUD, married Patrick GUERRAND-HERMES, and they resided in the famous Villa Aïn Kassimou in Marrakech. This connection sheds light on the intriguing relationships within this circle.

@jol_vil - Jol Vil

Ce TweeX est explosif! Même @zoesagan à peur de sortir l'info, c'est pour dire 🙄 Lors du 1er mariage de Brigitte Macron, un des témoins d'André AUZIERE, le mari fantôme, n'était rien d'autre que le commissaire Georges COSTES, de Pamiers, patron des RG en Algérie jusqu'en 1955.😮 https://t.co/BGV0CfCZ3f

@jol_vil - Jol Vil

COSTES était considéré comme l'homme du puissant et riche sénateur Henri BORGEAUD qui possédait en Algérie le domaine de la Trappe. Martine BORGEAUD, sa petite fille épousait Patrick GUERRAND-HERMES, avec qui elle habitait la Villa Aïn Kassimou à Marrakech si chère à Pierre BERGÉ https://t.co/OiKDy6Pu4x

@RikardRene — Rikard René 🇫🇷🇨🇦

Posted - November 19, 2023 at 3:34 PM

Saved - November 20, 2023 at 11:38 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

A conversation on sexual predators within the Macron administration was initiated by @RikardRene. @llias5109240799 responded with a link.

@RikardRene - Rikard René 🇫🇷🇨🇦

Malaise sur BFMTV où Mathilde Viot révéle la longue liste des prédateurs sexuels de la Macronie Le présentateur, visiblement dépassé tente de contenir l'onde de choc mais c'est trop tard https://t.co/LVBQeux5ci

Video Transcript AI Summary

Gérald Darmanin, Nicolas Hulot, and Damien Abad have been accused of sexual assault. There have been no convictions in some cases. Benoît Simon was accused and convicted of domestic violence, Stéphane Trump was accused of sexual harassment, and Yannick Ori was reported to the authorities for sexual assault on an elected official. Gilles Legendre, former president of the majority group, was reported for sexual assault, while Olivier Duhamel, close to Macron, was accused of rape but not convicted due to the statute of limitations. Chrysula Zakaropoulou was accused of rape, Pierre Cabaret of emotional and sexual harassment, and Joël Guerriau mentioned the connection to Macron. Eric Dupond-Moretti, known for sexism in courtrooms, was suspended for inappropriate behavior. Dominique Boutonnat, a donor to Macron, was accused of rape. Marc Guillaume was accused of sexual harassment, and Laurent Bigorne, close to Emmanuel Macron, was convicted of assaulting a colleague after administering substances.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Gérald Darmanin accusé le viol, Nicolas Hulot accusé de viol, Damien Abad accusé de viol après administration de substances. Speaker 1: Vous avez précisé parenthèse qu'il y a eu daignons lieu dans certaines affaires. Speaker 0: Oui j'ai dit accuser, j'ai dit. Speaker 2: Non non non mais c'est Speaker 1: important mais voilà mais je suis journaliste absence de condamnation dans d'autres affaires voilà je vous laisse continuer. Speaker 0: Couvrons-nous. Ça. Benoît Simon accusé et condamné pour violences conjugales, Stéphane Trump accusé d'harcèlement sexuel, Yannick Ori signal à la justice sa pour agression sexuelle sur une élue Gilles Legendre ancien président du groupe majoritaire signal à la justice pour agression sexuelle Olivier Duhamel proche de Macron ça. Présérant la rotonde le soir de la victoire et accusé de viol, non condamné pour faits prescrit, Chrysula Zakaropoulou accusé de viol, ça. Pierre Cabaret accusé d'harcèlement moral, d'harcèlement sexuel et d'agression sexuelle. Joël Guerriau, horizon, on peut considérer que ça fait partie de l'univers de la Macronie. Ça. Eric Dupond-Moretti qui est quand même le grand ordonnateur du sexisme dans les prétoires qui a été suspendu après avoir touché son sexe devant une magistrate que maintenant il décide de poursuivre ça pour des faits qui a priori se sont assez peu avérés Dominique Boutonnat grand donateur de Macron président du CNC accusé de viol Speaker 2: Pour vous c'est quelque chose qui est marqué j'ai ma limite Speaker 0: attendez sa situation. Je sais que c'est douloureux. Speaker 2: Je sais que c'est douloureux. Je sais Speaker 0: que c'est douloureux. Marc Guillaume accusé d'harcèlement sexuel Laurent Bigorne proche d'Emmanuel Macron condamné pour avoir ça. D'agresser une collaboratrice après administration de substances. Speaker 1: Chaque collaboratrice était en direct avec nous hier soir à témoigner. Speaker 2: Qu'est-ce que vous voulez démontrer parce que

@llias5109240799 - Âllias

@RikardRene https://t.co/dVrxk7MqmR

@adrenaline1001 — Adrenaline ✞ 🇫🇷

Posted - December 3, 2023 at 10:39 AM

Saved - December 3, 2023 at 2:14 PM

@adrenaline1001 - Adrenaline ✞ 🇫🇷

Comment l’élection de Macron est irrégulière car les élections ont été truquées⬇️ En Charente sur 134 procurations manuscrites 64 n’existaient pas .. le résultat s’étant joué à 24 voix cela laisse perplexe : ⚠️#Macron a donc été élu irrégulièrement⚠️ https://t.co/Hv3vy8ZuLR

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speaker questions Monsieur Darmanin about the removal of citizen control over elections. They mention that the annexation of proxy lists to the voting records has been eliminated, making it technically impossible to verify a vote. They express the difficulty in making a recourse within the given ten-day timeframe due to the decentralization of the process. The speaker shares their personal experience of finding 64 non-existent proxy votes out of 134 in their constituency, which raises concerns about dishonest practices. They ask Monsieur Darmanin how he plans to address these issues in the upcoming European elections to protect democracy.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Monsieur Darmanin, vos services ont-ils peur du contrôle citoyen sur les élections Gravé auparavant dans le code électoral, l'annexion des listes de procuration au procès verbaux de chaque bureau de vote est supprimée par le décret du onze mars deux-mille-vingt-et-un. Celui du vingt-deux décembre confirme que ces listes restent en mairie. Enfin, la circulaire du trente-et-un décembre à quatre mois de la présidentielle et cinq mois des législatives, ordonne au maire de ne plus annexer ses listes au p v. Cet enchaînement méticuleux rend techniquement impossible la vérification d'un scrutin, car la préfecture n'est plus le lieu centralisateur. En dix jours, délai imparti pour faire un recours, prendre rendez-vous dans les vingt-deux mairies de ma circonscription est quasi impossible. Pour celles composées de centaines de communes, cela relève du miracle, une capacité somme toute peu commune chez les candidats. Le matériel peut toujours être rapatrié au Conseil constitutionnel sur demande d'un avocat qu'il s'agit de payer trois mille euros pour y faire ce qui se faisait gratuitement en préfecture. Ensuite venir consulter le tout à Paris et ce en une demi-journée, une gageure. Monsieur Darmanin, pourtant nous l'avons fait pour ma circonscription de Charente. Sur cent-trente-quatre procurations manuscrites, soixante-quatre n'existaient pas. Le résultat s'étant joué à vingt-quatre voix, cela laisse pour le moins perplexe. Monsieur le ministre, des personnes malhonnêtes en ont profité pour tricher. Triche en Charente, erreur de bulletins dans les bureaux de l'Ariège, profession de foi non distribuée un peu partout, bref, comment comptez-vous corriger le tir aux élections européennes de juin afin d'éradiquer ces pratiques qui abîment un peu plus notre démocratie Merci, la parole est à

@zoesagan — Zoé Sagan

Posted - February 19, 2024 at 3:24 PM

Saved - March 14, 2024 at 2:48 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The posts discuss the identity of "Brigitte" who is associated with the French government. Using AI tools, the author compares the facial recognition results of "Brigitte" with Brigitte Trogneux and Jean-Michel Trogneux. The results indicate that "Brigitte" is more likely to be Jean-Michel Trogneux. The author suggests using Chinese AI to verify the results with family photos.

@zoesagan - Zoé Sagan

🚨🔥BREAKING NEWS: Comprendre l’affaire (tentaculaire) Trogneux en (seulement) 3 points 👇 L’affaire Jean-Michel Trogneux consiste simplement à déterminer l’identité de naissance de « Brigitte », l’étrange créature qui squatte l’Elysée et compose le gouvernement depuis 2017. Les outils d’intelligence artificielle permettent aujourd’hui de répondre à la question que tout le monde se pose : qui est « Brigitte » ? Question 1 : « Brigitte » est-elle Brigitte Trogneux (ici en 1974 à 21 ans), comme le cartel médiatique nous le vend ? L’IA vous donne un résultat d’environ 56%, que ce soit en prenant une photo récente ou ancienne de « Brigitte »…

@zoesagan - Zoé Sagan

Question 2 : « Brigitte » est-elle Jean-Michel Trogneux (ici à 11 ans en 1955 ans) ? Avec les mêmes photos vous obtenez respectivement 67,7% (soit +11 points) et 71,9% (soit + 15 points). https://t.co/mblOybwdsN

@zoesagan - Zoé Sagan

Question 3 : Quand a éclaté l’affaire, l’Elysée a démenti, tout en laissant dire que Jean-Michel Trogneux était un « petit gros ». Problème, quand on demande à la reconnaissance faciale si Jean-Michel Trogneux est le « petit gros », on obtient un résultat nettement inférieur (quelques -15 points) par rapport au score obtenu par « Brigitte ». Conclusion : « Brigitte » EST Jean-Michel Trogneux. Si vous doutez encore, entrez vos photos de famille dans l’IA chinoise et regardez les résultats obtenus !

@QuartzTrad — Quartz Traduction

Posted - March 14, 2024 at 5:10 AM

Saved - March 15, 2024 at 8:45 AM

@QuartzTrad - Quartz Traduction

💥💥LES MÉDIAS S'ENFLAMMENT ! La première dame de France EXPOSÉE. Candace Owen en remet une couche ! VERSION DOUBLÉE EN FRANÇAIS🇫🇷 https://t.co/L1nPIxG7sr

Video Transcript AI Summary

The speaker shows childhood photos and discusses the theory that Brigitte Macron lived as a man for 30 years. They argue that it would be easy for her to debunk the theory by showing photos of her early years. The speaker claims that the French press is involved in covering up the alleged truth. They argue that if the theory is true, it would have significant implications for France and suggest that an investigation should be conducted. The speaker also discusses the lack of evidence for Brigitte Macron's ex-husband and presents a theory that Jean-Michel Trogneux, who became Brigitte Macron, had children with his niece. They criticize the media for not addressing the allegations and claim that journalists are planning to reveal more about the situation.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Bon mercredi à tous. J'ai décidé de commencer cet épisode en vous montrant quelques photos de mon enfance. Jetez un coup d'œil. C'est moi avec mon grand-père, comme c'est mignon, je devais avoir quatre ans sur cette photo. Voici une autre photo où il y a mes deux soeurs et moi, on dirait que j'ai neuf ans sur cette photo et oui, regardez cette tunique en flanelle, c'est trop beau, j'adore. Et puis cette photo date certainement du collège, je ne sais pas, mais je je je ne sais pas ce que je fais là, mais je je porte un appareil dentaire, il y a des barres de sneakers éparpillées sur le lit, j'aime vraiment ces friandises. Maintenant pourquoi je vous montre ces photos bien ce n'est pas parce que je me sens nostalgique aujourd'hui, c'est parce que je voulais vous montrer à quel point il serait facile pour Brigitte Macron de démystifier, je cite, la théorie du complot, selon laquelle elle aurait vécu en tant qu'homme pendant trente ans. C'est aussi simple que cela les amis, voilà tout. Nous voulons juste voir une photo de vos trente premières années. Pouvez-vous nous en montrer une ou deux Très bien les amis, nous étions top tendance hier en France. Oui, Kendense awen en France. Une grosse affaire, j'adore. Pourquoi Pour avoir mené une recherche fondamentale, une enquête vraiment fondamentale sur les affirmations crédibles selon lesquelles Brigitte Macron est en fait né Jean-Michel Trogneux et a vécu pendant trente ans en tant qu'homme avant de transitionner en femme. Et devinez quoi Emmanuel Macron est furieux, il est très énervé. Regardez ce titre du Daily Mail, on peut y dire Emmanuel Macron furieux s'exprime enfin sur les affirmations selon sa femme Brigitte est née homme. Il est vraiment furieux, il est tellement furieux, que va-t-il faire bien je lui suggère de montrer des photos des trente premières années de la vie de sa femme. C'est aussi simple que ça, tant de colère, tant de non, tant d'insultes, tant d'attaques ad hominèmes, aucune tentative de débunkage, et pourtant c'est si facile, c'est vraiment si facile. Pourquoi est-ce si important Certains se demandent pourquoi c'est important. Je veux juste vous demander de revenir en arrière. Vous êtes fou pour demander pourquoi quelque chose d'aussi énorme aurait de l'importance. Cela signifierait que la France est potentiellement dirigée par un menteur psychopathe et un pédophile, telles seraient les implications s'il s'avérait que cette affaire est vraie. Cela signifierait également que l'ensemble de la presse française est impliqué dans la tentative de dissimulation de cet énorme mensonge. Quelle autre raison est-ce important Jetez un coup d'œil à ce tweet écrit par ce ressortissant français. Il se traduit en gros par, la folie, c'est d'avoir fermé les yeux, nous les français en deux-mille-dix-sept. Accepter qu'un enfant vampirisé par un adulte devienne notre chef, sans même se soucier de la morale et de l'éthique, sans même reconnaître que cela est forcément une incidence psychotique sur le bonhomme. En d'autres termes, c'est très important, parce que comme je l'ai dit, cela signifierait que la France, très semblable à l'Amérique, n'a pas de presse, nous n'aurions qu'une extension du gouvernement qui fait semblant de rapporter les informations. Cette fois-ci, les informations sont très crédibles, si seulement il voulait en parler. L'histoire ici semble incroyablement crédible. Et je pense que c'est encore plus crédible, en raison du niveau incroyable du détournement qui est en cours de la presse française dans son ensemble. La presse grand public attaque, théorie du complot, débunkage, extrême droite, transphobe, bla bla bla bla bla bla. Ces tours de magie ne fonctionnent plus, réveillez-vous, ça ne marche plus, nous n'en avons plus rien à faire. Les habitants de tous ces pays en ont assez d'être régulièrement traités de tous les noms, alors que vous n'avez aucune preuve du contraire. Et peut-être que la raison est pour laquelle des gens comme moi existent et ont une tribune, c'est parce que vous avez menti sur absolument tout. Vous ne cessez de vous faire prendre en flagrant délit de mensonge. Par exemple le Covid, nous avons dénoncé cette fraude dès le début. Désormais tout le monde a aimé que peut-être on s'est trompé, non non non, vous avez toujours su que vous vous trompiez. Vous avez testé le pouvoir dont vous disposiez au niveau international en ce qui concerne le Covid, forcé les gens à se conformer à des absurdités. Aussi avec BLM, je me suis immédiatement demandé où allait tout cet argent, puis j'ai révélé qu'il s'agissait d'une fraude dans un documentaire entier. Donald Trump, oh il est comme Adolf Hitler. C'est un mensonge. La Russie, l'Ukraine, l'ordinateur portable de Hunter Biden, vous n'arrêtez pas de mentir. Ce que j'ai à faire est en fait très simple et très amusant. Mon travail est en fait si facile. Tout ce que j'ai à faire, c'est de ne pas mentir et de ne pas tromper le public. J'essaie de répondre à leurs questions. Récapitulons brièvement ces affirmations et si vous ne savez pas de quoi nous parlons, retournez au début et regardez l'épisode de lundi. Il a déjà été visionné plus d'un million de fois. Les gens du monde entier sont attentifs car comme je l'ai dit, les mensonges racontés dans la presse en ce moment sont absolument insensés. Je récapitule brièvement. Premier point, on prétend que Brigitte Macron a vécu en tant qu'homme prénommé Jean-Michel pendant trente ans avant de devenir Brigitte. Voici une photo côte à côte, c'est tout de suite très crédible. Deuxième point, Brigitte Macron affirme que non non non, Jean-Michel est son frère. Le problème, c'est que son frère a disparu. Elle prétend que son frère est en vie. Il serait très facile pour elle de se promener avec lui et de dire, voici Jean-Michel. Il se trouve que nous nous ressemblons, mais non, Brigitte Macron refuse de le faire. Et puis en termes de données généalogiques, les gens sur internet et cherchent. Ce qu'ils ont révélé, c'est qu'une personne nommée Jean-Michel a existé pendant une trentaine d'années, puis a cessé d'exister. Et tout à coup Brigitte Macron est arrivé et a existé. Donc oui, c'est problématique. Troisième point, il n'existe aucune photo de Brigitte Macron au cours des trente premières années de sa vie. C'est le point le plus important. Encore une fois, comme je l'ai démontré, il est très facile de montrer des photos de votre vie durant vos trente premières années. En fait, c'est le contraire qui se produit. À un moment, la presse a essayé de faire passer une photo en noir et blanc de sa fille et a dit, voilà Brigitte. Une tentative désespérée de prétendre que Brigitte a existé en tant qu'enfant. Voici une photo côte à côte. Il s'agit Quatrième point, la presse internationale n'a pas pu localiser son prétendu ex-mari avec lequel elle aurait eu trois enfants. Et ce n'est pas rien. Lorsqu'Emmanuel Macron est devenu président, la presse internationale qui n'essayait pas d'élaborer une théorie de complot s'est contentée de dire, c'est bizarre, nous n'avons pas trouvé son ex-mari. Et ce qui est peut-être encore plus bizarre, c'est qu'ils ont également essayé de faire passer une fausse photo de lui pour une preuve de son existence. Voici la photo de lui qui a été diffusée. Il s'agit en fait d'une photo de la faculté de l'école où Brigitte enseignait à la providence. L'homme sur cette photo s'appelle Claude Hugo, un collègue enseignant, mais que se passe-t-il donc Ce qui nous amène au cinquième point. Si ces affirmations sont vraies, elles devraient faire l'objet d'une enquête. Cela signifierait que Brigitte Macron est en fait âgée de soixante-dix-huit ans, soit huit ans de plus que ce qu'elle prétend. Ce que confirment d'ailleurs les diverses interviews accordées au cours des années, où Brigitte semble toujours oublier l'âge qu'elle est censée avoir. Par exemple, comme nous l'avons évoqué, elle a déclaré de manière peu plausible qu'elle vivait aux États-Unis lors de l'alunissage de mille-neuf-cent-soixante-neuf. Sauf cela aurait fait de Brigitte une jeune fille de seize ans. Elle a dit qu'elle vivait seule lors de l'alunissage. Non, les jeunes de seize ans ne sont pas autorisés à vivre seule aux États-Unis. Mais si elle avait huit ans de plus, si Brigitte avait vingt-quatre ans, elle aurait très bien pu vivre seule. Aujourd'hui nous allons nous pencher sur quelque chose que les gens ne comprennent pas très bien. Je veux donc que ce soit clair pour vous. La question est de savoir comment elle a pu avoir des enfants si elle était un homme. Vous pouvez voir une certaine ressemblance entre elle et Tiphaine. Cela ne fait aucun doute, n'est-ce pas Kenden, ça n'a pas pu se produire, c'est ridicule. Bien les gars, on prétend qu'elle a engendré les enfants. Encore une fois, je dis cela prétendument, et je vais vous présenter cette théorie. Ce qui est affirmé est que tout en vivant comme un homme, Jean-Michel a engendré des enfants et ce sont les trois enfants que vous voyez aujourd'hui. Nous allons donc passer cette partie en revue lentement. Rappelez-vous que la presse internationale n'a pas pu trouver la moindre trace de son prétendu ex-mari qui aurait été un grand banquier. C'est un peu bizarre de ne pas pouvoir trouver un grand banquet. Ils ont dit qu'il s'appelait André Louis Ozière. Son nom complet aurait été André Louis Ozière. Il était désigné comme sous-directeur de la délégation régionale de la banque française du commerce extérieur. La banque française du commerce extérieur se trouve à Strasbourg. Le seul problème est qu'il n'existe aucune trace de cette banque dans le secteur bancaire. Oups. Alors que la presse commence à creuser la question, Tiphaine, la fille de Brigitte annonce soudain qu'il est mort. Mort subitement les gars. Oui, et elle a toutes ses déclarations bizarres. S'adressant à Paris Match, qui fait a confirmé le décès de son père en disant je cite, mon père est mort, je l'ai enterré le vingt-quatre décembre dans la plus stricte intimité. C'est ce qu'elle a dit au magazine. Je l'adorais, elle a poursuivi en disant, c'était un être à part, un anticonformiste, qui tenait à son anonymat plus que tout. Il faut le respecter. C'est une façon intéressante de présenter les choses, comme si l'on disait en substance, stop, il voulait être discret, ne fouillez rien, vous devez respecter cet homme mort, mon père. Oui, c'est c'est très triste si votre père est mort. C'est juste que je trouve que ces derniers mots étranges ressemblent en quelque sorte à une menace, à un avertissement de ne pas chercher plus loin. Le seul problème de cette déclaration, est qu'elle s'est apparemment trompée de date. Les archives publiques révèlent qu'il est mort le vingt-quatre décembre. Rappelez-vous, elle a, elle a dit qu'elle l'avait enterré le vingt-quatre décembre. Les registres indiquent qu'il est mort à cette date et qu'il a ensuite été incinéré le vingt-huit décembre. Encore une fois, je veux juste dire que la personne qui ne peut même pas être localisée est maintenant soudainement morte et sa fille confond peut-être les dates, et c'est ce qui est très étrange. La seule photo qu'ils aient jamais présentée du prétendu mariage entre Brigitte, devenue Brigitte Macron et son premier mari apparemment inexistant, est celle-ci. Vous avez peut-être pu voir cette photo circuler, mais cette photo a été débunkée. Il a été prouvé qu'ils l'ont agrandi. Il s'agit en fait d'une photo d'un homme nommé Jean-Louis Osière, avec sa première femme Susan Spray. Et là on se demande pourquoi Jean-Louis Osière, si c'est en fait une photo de lui et de sa première femme, ne sortirait-il pas pour dire, en fait c'est une photo de moi et ma première femme et les Macron, Brigitte Macron utilisent cette photo et elle circule C'est une véritable supercherie. Vous remarquerez également qu'il porte le même nom de famille que ses enfants et que son prétendu premier mari osière. Mais qu'est-ce qui se passe ici, c'est vraiment bizarre. Apparemment il est lié d'une manière ou d'une autre à son mari qui n'existe pas. Voyons cela de plus près, je vais vous expliquer très lentement ce qu'il en est. Voici la théorie et encore une fois je tiens à préciser que je le crois crédible au vu de la réaction de la presse et de l'absence de démenti, mais il ne s'agit que d'une théorie. La théorie est que Jean Louis, cette personne que vous venez de voir, la personne photographiée sur cette photo de mariage, était extrêmement proche de Jean-Michel Trogneux, devenu Brigitte Macron, ok Lui et Jean-Michel Trogneux étaient extrêmement proches. En fait, il est membre de l'équipe enseignante de la providence. Et Jean-Michel a eu des enfants, trois enfants avec sa nièce. Une femme nommée Brigitte Proba-Ozières, ce qui est assez déroutant. Ralentissons un peu d'accord, la personne dont ils ont utilisé la photo, Jean-Louis, a une nièce qui s'appelle Brigitte Ozière. Je vous montre une photo ici, Brigitte Proba Osière. Avec qui Jean-Michel, aujourd'hui première dame de France, a eu trois enfants. Alors quand Jean-Michel a décidé de faire une transition après avoir eu ses trois enfants avec cette nièce, Jean-Louis a aidé son ami parce qu'il faisait partie de la famille. Le père des enfants de la nièce, essentiellement de la famille, il a dit, je vais vous aider dans cette transition. Et comment a-t-il aidé son ami bien, Jean-Louis aurait des très étroits avec les services secrets français. Cela a donc rendu les choses très faciles, ou du moins plus faciles. Ce qu'ils ont fait ici est presque un tour de passe-passe. Brigitte Proba-Ozières, sa nièce et la mère des enfants de Jean-Michel Trogneux existaient déjà, n'est-ce pas pas Brigitte existait déjà. Ce qu'ils ont donc fait, c'est qu'ils ont transitionné Jean-Michel avec le même nom. Ils ont fait de Jean-Michel Brigitte, que c'est plus confus. Ils ont ensuite créé un faux mari, André Louis, qui n'a jamais existé, du moins d'après les archives publiques, il est très difficile de trouver cet homme. Encore une fois, c'était un tour de passe-passe parfait, parce que maintenant, ils se disent, Brigitte Osière existe ou a existé. Non, en fait c'est une nièce, il a aidé son ami. Et l'histoire devient plus sombre et encore plus tordue. Encore une fois les gars, je vous guide lentement à travers tout cela, parce qu'ils ont voulu que cela soit confus. Nous ne découvrons pas tout, parce que personnellement, il faut que vous le sachiez en France, personnellement j'aime les défis. J'adore quand les médias se lancent à corps perdu et commencent à utiliser des mots comme théorie du complot, fou et extrême droite, parce que c'est ce qu'ils font depuis des années et que les gens s'en rendent compte. Comme je l'ai dit, le tour de magie ne fonctionne plus. Nous vous demandons de faire une chose très simple, montrez-nous les photos des trente années. Si nous sommes si fous et si conspirationnistes, s'il vous plaît, montrez-nous les photos de la jeunesse de Brigitte Macron, ce serait si simple. En fait, il est insensé, comme Macron le furieux, ne le fasse pas. Il est insensé que la presse s'efforce de protéger ce récit. Il est tellement évident qu'il est suspicieux de ne pas faire quelque chose d'aussi basique et d'aussi facile qui dissuaderait toutes les rumeurs. Et devinez quoi maintenant Ce n'est pas seulement une histoire énorme qui se passe en France, c'est une histoire énorme qui se passe en Amérique. Il y a plusieurs journalistes qui prévoient de faire de grandes révélations sur cette affaire. Vous êtes donc averti, les médias français, je ne voudrais pas être dans le camp du mal, dans le camp du mensonge, mais qui suis-je pour vous dire ce que vous devez faire C'est tout ce que j'ai à dire à ce sujet.

@angeloinchina — Angelo Giuliano 🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻 安德龙

Posted - March 15, 2024 at 1:16 PM

Saved - March 16, 2024 at 9:38 PM

@angeloinchina - Angelo Giuliano 🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻 安德龙

Important interview of Brigitte Macron where she gives explanation about transphobic rumours https://t.co/xkUstXyxIy

Video Transcript AI Summary

J'ai été victime d'identité erronée sur les réseaux sociaux. Au début, ça m'a blessé, mais j'ai pris du recul et j'ai entendu parler de cela.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Vous aussi vous avez été victime des réseaux sociaux récemment on a dit que vous étiez un homme sur les réseaux sociaux. D'abord ça vous a blessé ça C'est-à-dire au début j'ai regardé ça d'un petit peu loin, j'en j'en entendais parler mais bon.

@anon_welsh — ProperGander17🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

Posted - March 15, 2024 at 2:43 PM

Saved - March 16, 2024 at 10:02 AM

@anon_welsh - ProperGander17🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

@UnityNewsNet The 16 page document on Macron and his "wife" is here. It's explosive 💣 pressibus.free.fr/gen/trogneux/i…

@RedpillDrifter — Redpill Drifter

Posted - July 30, 2024 at 5:38 AM

Saved - July 30, 2024 at 6:47 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I previously discussed the controversial claim that Brigitte Macron is actually Jean-Michel Trogneux, her supposed brother. Journalist Natacha Rey asserts she has evidence supporting this, noting the absence of photos of Brigitte before her 30s and the mysterious disappearance of her brother. Rey connects this to the controversial figure Joseph Doucé, who was involved in dark activities. Additionally, I explored the significance of androgyny in occult philosophy, particularly relating to the figure of Baphomet, suggesting a broader agenda linked to transgender ideology.

@RedpillDrifter - Redpill Drifter

EMMANUEL MACRONS WIFE BRIGITTE IS A MAN (I posted this before, but because France been at the center of attention lately, let's see the possible reasons why shall we?) She is really Jean-Michel Trogneux (which is the name of Brigitte Macron’s supposed brother) No pictures of Brigitte before her 30s have been produced, and no pictures or appearances of her brother have been seen since Brigitte Macron came on the scene "The journalist Natacha Rey, who is the author, said she had firm evidence that the first lady was born Jean Michel Trogneux, a transgender male. Rey has been researching the shady past of Brigitte and the curious disappearance of her alleged “brother”." "Jean Michel Trogneux was last spotted in the company of the highly controversial Joseph Doucé (since found murdered) in the late eighties of the previous century, around the time when Brigitte appeared, said Rey. The pastor was the first advocate of gay marriages and trans surgery and head of a pedophile ring. Many suspect that Doucé had played a role similar to that of Jeffrey Epstein: Blackmailing those in power." BAPHOMET THE ADROGYN AND TRANSGENDERISM Why is transgender ideology and trans movement so important to them? Because, in essence, it is a satanic agenda. Baphomet, the deity worshipped among satanists, and the occult orders is, in fact, an androgynous being bearing the characteristics of both sexes. "The concept of androgeneity is of a great importance in occult philosophy as it is representing the highest level of initiation in the quest of becoming “one with God”." A deep dive into the Androgynous Baphomet https://vigilantcitizen.com/hidden-knowledge/whoisbaphomet/ Source article for further research on Brigitte Macron https://freewestmedia.com/2022/01/10/rumours-that-brigitte-macron-is-a-man-continue-to-spread/

Who is Baphomet? Baphomet is an enigmatic, goat-headed figure found in several instance in the history of occultism. From the Knights Templar of the Middle-Ages and the Freemasons of the 19th century to modern currents of occultism, Baphomet never fails to create controversy. But where does Baphomet originate from and, most importantly, what is the true meaning of vigilantcitizen.com

Rumours persist that Brigitte Macron is a man The source of this information on Brigitte Macron's past life was in articles published in September in the journal Faits et Documents citing extensive evidence of a massive cover-up about a trans figure in the freewestmedia.com

@ai_qube_fr — Dr Qube

Posted - February 17, 2025 at 11:42 PM

Saved - February 23, 2025 at 10:18 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

In the latest episode of Becoming Brigitte, I discuss Xavier Poussard's revealing interview, where he uncovers inconsistencies surrounding Brigitte's past and her connection to Jean-Michel Trogneux. Poussard highlights media manipulation and presents evidence of JMT's existence, including a military record from Algeria. He argues that Macron has been influenced since childhood by JMT. Despite ongoing investigations, the true fate of Brigitte remains unknown, and Poussard's findings suggest a hidden narrative behind France's leadership. The atmosphere seems tense as Brigitte's team faces scrutiny.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(1/13) Le dernier épisode de #BecomingBrigitte dévoile l’interview de #XavierPoussard à visage découvert. Pour #CandaceOwens, la conclusion est sans appel : la France est dirigée par un homosexuel dérangé et sa victime enfant ! le coupe 47-14!!! Je vous raconte tout.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(2/13) #XavierPoussard dévoile son visage pour la première fois et explique comment la surmédiatisation de Brigitte en 2016, les incohérences de dates et la nervosité des médias lorsqu'on évoque le jeune âge de Macron (14 ans) l'ont alerté.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(3/13) Puis vient la première révélation : la presse a longuement parlé de la famille de Brigitte, sauf de JMT. Par hasard, #XavierPoussard trouve sa trace dans les archives, forçant la famille à reconnaître son existence et à diffuser une photo.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(4/13) Xavier affirme que cette photo a été manipulée. Voici l’originale. Qui peut trouver la différence avec la précédente ?

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(5/13) L’abat-jour et l’ombre ont été effacés pour ne pas attirer l’œil vers l’enfant à gauche ! En 2021, Natacha contacte Xavier. Convaincue que Brigitte est née Jean-Michel Trogneux.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(6/13) Certains détails restent néanmoins flous, mais Natacha souhaite publier ses conclusions et elle est attaquée en diffamation par Brigitte (sur les détails et jamais sur le fond). Xavier, lui, poursuit ses recherches.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(7/13) Il consulte les archives, récupère 200 noms d'anciens camarades et confirme que Brigitte Trogneux et JMT ont existé. Mais jusqu’en juin 2023, aucune photo vérifiée d’eux.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(8/13) Il consulte le registre militaire, obligatoire à l'époque, et découvre que JMT a été déclaré en Algérie. En 2017, Brigitte avait d’ailleurs admis y avoir étudié. Pour Xavier, l’Algérie connaît le secret de Macron et l’a révélé via un journal proche du gouvernement pour le punir de son rapprochement avec le Maroc.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(9/13) Le même Maroc qui a espionné Macron avec le logiciel israélien Pegasus et s'est servi de ces informations pour l'éloigner de l'Algérie. (C'est une affaire de sûreté de l'État. Que fait l'armée ? Lecornu (ministre de la défense), un proche de Brigitte, est le seul à ne pas bouger lors des remaniements !)

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(10/13) Xavier rappelle la tentative de faire croire que cet homme sur les photos est JMT, mais les photos échouent au test du logiciel de reconnaissance faciale. Le narratif officiel s'effondre comme un château de cartes.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(11/13) #Candace tente de mettre cette histoire en perspective, en la liant aux Young Leaders, dont les passés sont souvent remplis de zones d'ombre (elle mentionne d'ailleurs Obama comme autre exemple).

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(12/13) Xavier tente de conclure sur une note d'espoir : les signes de l'affaiblissement du pouvoir de #Brigitte et #Macron se multiplient, mais cette phase finale reste l'une des plus dangereuses. #Candace termine son enquête en affirmant que Macron a été manipulé à l'âge de 14 ans par JMT, un homosexuel de 47 ans, et que ce couple dirige la France depuis 2017.

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

(13/13) Les principales conclusions de cette enquête : ➡️Personne ne sait ce qu’est devenue la vraie Brigitte Trogneux. ➡️#Macron et #Brigitte auraient pu mettre fin à cette histoire facilement. Le travail rigoureux de Xavier, jamais contesté, ne laisse aucun doute : un homosexuel, né JMT et non élu, est aux commandes de la France après avoir manipulé un enfant de 14 ans!!

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

Le livre de Xavier Poussard: https://amzn.to/4gNt9Jg

@ai_qube_fr - Dr Qube

@PChaibriant - patricia chaibriant

Le garde du corps de Brigitte Macron a mis les voiles en même temps qu’une demi-douzaine de collaborateurs... Ça a l'air d'être la chaude l'ambiance en ce moment 😂 #BecomingBrigitte https://www.gala.fr/l_actu/news_de_stars/brigitte-macron-son-garde-du-corps-au-physique-avantageux-a-mis-les-voiles-20250212

Brigitte Macron : son garde du corps au physique avantageux a mis les voiles ! Depuis 2017, le lieutenant Fabien était en charge de la sécurité de Brigitte Macron. Repéré par la presse, française et étrangère, à plusieurs reprises lors d’événements, il a quitté ses fonctions il y a quelques semaines. gala.fr

@foxblog3 — thefoxblog

Posted - February 25, 2025 at 6:54 PM

Saved - July 1, 2025 at 11:17 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I shared a thread exploring the controversial claims about Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron, suggesting that Brigitte may actually be Jean-Michel Trogneux. I compared images of both, noting the lack of information about their early lives and the peculiar upbringing of Emmanuel, who was raised by his grandmother instead of his parents. I also pointed out similarities between Emmanuel and various figures, including the Rothschilds. My previous posts delve deeper into these theories, highlighting the strange journey of becoming Brigitte and Emmanuel.

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

1. Thread 🧵on Becoming Brigitte - Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron investigated by Xavier Poussard, Natacha Rey, Candace Owens and others. Thankyou

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

2. The thesis is that Brigitte is in fact Jean-Michel Trogneux, the boy on the left not the girl sitting on the lap of the lady.

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

3. This is the comparison of Jean Michel Trogneux and Brigitte Macron

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

4. This is the comparison of Brigitte Macron with an 18 year old Jean Michel Trogneux

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

5. Officially there is almost no information of a young Brigitte, and the same applies to Emmanuel Macron. Just a few photos of Emmanuel by himself and none with his parents... how odd

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

6. Emmanuel's parents by the official story are Jean-Michel Macron, a neuropsychiatrist and his mother Francis Nogues, a paediatrician with a specialism in transgender cases, both born in 1950.

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

7. For some reason, according to the official story Emmanuel was not really brought up by his official parents pictured here but by his maternal grandmother.

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

8. Germaine "Manette" Noges would have been 54 when Emmanuelle was born. She apparently instilled in the young Emmanuel a love for the authors André Gide and Michel Tournier who tell tales of pedophilia!

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

9. Jumping to 25 July 1977 Gay Pride in Paris

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

10. Two of these gay pride marchers look very like Emmanuel Macron's parents. Becoming Brigitte and Emmanuel sure was a strange journey.

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

11. The man in the top hat looks very like Brigitte... Was he on his way to becoming Brigitte?

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

12. Why does Jean-Jacques Trogneux, from Brigitte's side of the family look so similar to Emmanuel Macron?

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

13. Why does Emmanuel look remarkably like the Rothschilds?

@sagan_army - Sagan Army 👁

Photo 1 : La baronne Liliane de Rothschild Photo 2 : La fille de la baronne Liliane de Rothschild : Nelly de Rothschild Photo 3 : (à gauche en N&B) David de Rothschild, le cousin au troisième degré de Nelly Photo 4 : Le même David de Rothschild, plus vieux 🧐🧐🧐

@sagan_army - Sagan Army 👁

Mais quels sont les VÉRITABLES liens de parenté entre David de Rothschild & Emanuel Macron ? 🧐🤔🤫

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

14. My article is Macroni Baloney Becoming Brigitte https://foxyfox.substack.com/p/macroni-baloney trans emmannuel macron candace owens

Macroni Baloney The French first family is a sick mess. foxyfox.substack.com

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

15. This was my post from last year - Macron's Wife "Brigitte" Exposé https://foxyfox.substack.com/p/macrons-wife-brigitte-expose emmanuel macron brigitte

Macron's Wife "Brigitte" Exposé President of France Emmanuel Macron’s wife “Brigitte” was born a man and is pretending to be his dead older sister. The official story was already that Brigitte was 24 years older than Macron, when they started going out when Macron was 15, but in fact Brigitte was over 30 years older. This is just the start… foxyfox.substack.com

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

16. Macroni Baloney Becoming Brigitte https://foxyfox.substack.com/p/macroni-baloney trans emmannuel macron candace owens

Macroni Baloney The French first family is a sick mess. foxyfox.substack.com

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

17. David Hamilton PedoCriminal https://foxyfox.substack.com/p/david-hamilton-pedocriminal DavidHamilton pedophile france macrons

David Hamilton PedoCriminal Does the Hamilton Case have repercussions for the Macrons? foxyfox.substack.com

@foxblog3 - thefoxblog

@reseeit save thread

@RadioGenoa — RadioGenoa

Posted - May 26, 2025 at 8:55 AM

Saved - May 26, 2025 at 1:29 PM

@RadioGenoa - RadioGenoa

Macron slapped by his wife Brigitte. https://t.co/cZDzdgPZnq

@Saffron_Sniper1 — Saffron Sniper

Posted - May 28, 2025 at 1:43 AM

Saved - May 28, 2025 at 7:56 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I shared a collection of the funniest memes about French President Emmanuel Macron's recent slap incident, which has taken the internet by storm. The thread features 25 hilarious takes, including satire on domestic violence awareness and playful jabs at Macron's public persona. I also made a lighthearted request for followers to join me for more entertaining content and mentioned my other threads, including one about the Paris Olympics and another on the human body. Enjoy the laughs and feel free to share!

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

French President Emmanuel Macron slap memes just broke the internet😂 A combined collection of the 25 funniest memes in one thread 🧵 Enjoy and share Max 😄 https://t.co/B9iII1RhO8

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

1. One of the hilarious meme 😂 https://t.co/h29NJDj20k

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

2. Macron just became the face of Men’s Domestic Violence Awareness. 🙏 (Ultimate Satire) https://t.co/W2Bq8o5S6w

Video Transcript AI Summary

Thousands of men suffer in silence from domestic violence every year. Domestic violence affects men, turning their homes into prisons. The internal pain manifests externally. The message is to stop running and seek help. The speaker urges men to call the men's domestic violence helpline, emphasizing that no one deserves to suffer in silence.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Every year, thousands of men suffer in silence. Domestic violence doesn't care if you're a man. When your home becomes your prison, who do you tell? When you're broken inside, it starts to show outside. At some point, you have to stop running. Call the men's domestic violence helpline because no one deserves to suffer in silence.

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

3. 🤣🤣🤣 https://t.co/AqafYC8n7B

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

4. 🤣🤣 https://t.co/8Pvoo008tn

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

5. https://t.co/1JmlcGNwiH

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

6. 🤣🤣🤣 https://t.co/vZB1nw84MU

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

7. 🤣🤣 https://t.co/AFQL9f3qwv

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

8. Blink twice if you beed help🤣🤣 https://t.co/Y4pwLFcFcB

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

9. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 https://t.co/VjpPrymwtd

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

10. Why Brigitte slapped Macron? 🤣 https://t.co/4LwbBJbtuk

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

11. 🤣🤣 https://t.co/0cParfMceP

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

12. 💀💀💀 https://t.co/ngnfQbKW8E

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

13. 🤣 https://t.co/OIZG6gQBI9

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

14. 🤣🤣 https://t.co/JOF7pkZvAR

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

15. 🤣🤣 https://t.co/BGyTkL7Azq

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

16. Hahaha… In the end, he got beaten https://t.co/NdeyhZY0nV

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

17. New Safety gear for Macron https://t.co/pJ0PjCbRfX

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

18. So Donald Trump was behind this 🤣 https://t.co/Tr7PplL9Jp

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

19. Why does he always get beaten? https://t.co/z9oEizaGYz

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

20. So, Zelensky was behind all this? 🤣 https://t.co/1kQZ2pNPVm

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

21. 🤣🤣 https://t.co/Ds4SiczNQb

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

22. Brigitte Tyson🤣 https://t.co/sutdrmBIQR

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

23. 😂Peace https://t.co/0llBW1jOTV

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

24. Russia did it 🤣 https://t.co/6mpGVvKkh1

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

25. This is 🔥🤣 https://t.co/TWDSsm0nIb

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

If this thread made you laugh like crazy, please repost the first tweet and follow me for more content like this! Follow @Saffron_Sniper1 ❤️ Tap below to open and repost the first tweet 👇

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

French President Emmanuel Macron slap memes just broke the internet😂 A combined collection of the 25 funniest memes in one thread 🧵 Enjoy and share Max 😄 https://t.co/B9iII1RhO8

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

Do you remember the Paris Olympics opening ceremony? That clown Macron was the one behind all that WOKE influence https://t.co/Zt7fVwEolr

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

Once again, a polite request: Kindly follow @Saffron_Sniper1 if you aren’t already — for interesting threads and memes ! https://t.co/RLuABdozHZ

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

Also don’t miss my this Thread👇 Open / Share Max

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

Heart-Breaking Last Moments Right Before Disaster Strikes - A Thread🧵 ⚠️Don’t open if you have a soft heart https://t.co/WePTROdqF7

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

I just dropped another interesting thread, check it out👇 Feel free to share or repost if you find it interesting ❤️

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

The human body, as you’ve probably never seen it before — A Thread🧵 ⚠️ Open this for a glimpse into God’s most magnificent creation—you 1. Blood vessels in the palm of the hand😮 https://t.co/FVPgbrPciz

@Saffron_Sniper1 - Saffron Sniper

I hope you’ve followed @Saffron_Sniper1 - Emmanuel Macron https://t.co/5tu7wCQtSv

@peacemaket71 — Peacemaker

Posted - July 3, 2025 at 3:03 PM

Saved - July 4, 2025 at 11:16 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I learned that François Faivre, a surgeon who claimed to have information about Brigitte Macron's transgender transformation, was found dead after falling from his apartment window in Paris. His sister insists he was not suicidal and suggests his death may be linked to an upcoming interview. Faivre had worked closely with Dr. Patrick Bouilly, a specialist in transgender surgeries, and had shared details about the procedures undergone by Mrs. Macron, which fueled conspiracy theories about her past.

@peacemaket71 - Peacemaker

🇫🇷 ‼️Surgeon who announced Brigitte Macron's transgender transformation found dead in Paris - Enquete du jour.‼️ It turned out that 58-year-old François Faivre fell out of the window of his apartment. His sister Anne Dupont claims that François was not suicidal and that his death is likely related to the revealing interview he was about to give soon. François Faivre was a colleague of the famous doctor specializing in transgender transformations Patrick Bouilly. It was his joint photos with Brigitte Macron that formed the basis of the corresponding "conspiracy theory" that she used to be a man. "I worked for six years at an American hospital in Paris and Dr. Bouilly was one of my close colleagues. He gave me a lot of information and documents about his patients. Including the physical changes that Mrs. Macron underwent during her transgender surgery," - said François Faivre in an interview with journalists Closer...from Telegram

Video Transcript AI Summary

Le 29 juin, François Febvre, 58 ans, chirurgien, a été retrouvé mort après une chute de sa fenêtre à Paris. Le médecin légiste a conclu au suicide, mais sa sœur, Anne Dupont, pense que sa mort est liée à un entretien qu'il devait donner concernant les opérations chirurgicales controversées de Brigitte Macron. Febvre était un collègue du docteur Patrick Bouilli. Dans un extrait d'entretien avec un journaliste de Closer, Febvre affirme détenir des informations sur son travail avec le docteur Bouilli à l'hôpital américain de Paris. Il déclare que Bouilli lui a parlé des changements physiques subis par Brigitte Macron lors d'une opération de chirurgie transgenre. Le sujet des opérations chirurgicales de Brigitte Macron a pris de l'ampleur en 2021 après la publication d'une émission d'investigation par la journaliste américaine Candace Owens. **English Translation:** On June 29, François Febvre, 58, a surgeon, was found dead after a fall from his window in Paris. The coroner ruled it a suicide, but his sister, Anne Dupont, believes his death is linked to an interview he was to give regarding Brigitte Macron's controversial surgeries. Febvre was a colleague of Dr. Patrick Bouilli. In an excerpt from an interview with a Closer journalist, Febvre claims to have information about his work with Dr. Bouilli at the American Hospital of Paris. He states that Bouilli told him about the physical changes Brigitte Macron underwent during transgender surgery. The topic of Brigitte Macron's surgeries gained traction in 2021 after the publication of an investigative program by American journalist Candace Owens.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Le vingt-neuf juin, un homme a été retrouvé mort après une terrible chute depuis sa fenêtre dans le deuxième arrondissement de Paris. Le bureau du médecin légiste a déclaré que François Febvre, âgé de cinquante-huit ans, s'est suicidé. Il était chirurgien à travailler dans une clinique parisienne. La soeur de François Febvre, Anne Dupont, affirme qu'il n'était pas suicidaire et que sa mort est probablement liée à l'entretien qu'il devait donner. Selon Mme Dupont, son frère est un collègue du célèbre docteur, monsieur Patrick Bouilli. François Febvre avait promis aux journalistes de faire la lumière sur les opérations chirurgicales controversées de Mme madame Petitcit Macron. Voici un extrait de la vidéo de son entretien avec un journaliste du magazine Closer. Speaker 1: J'ai encore beaucoup d'informations sous forme de notes, de copies de de. Lors de notre rencontre, je pourrais vous dire plus sur mon travail avec le docteur Patrick Bouhilly. J'ai travaillé à l'hôpital américain de Paris pendant 6 ans et docteur Bouhilly était un de mes proches collègues. Il m'a transmis beaucoup d'informations sur ses patients. Y compris sur l'épouse du président français Oui il m'a parlé des changements physiques que madame brigitte Macron a subi lors de l'opération de chirurgie transgenre dans l'hôpital. Vous parlez là de son opération de changement de sexe Pouvez-vous me raconter un peu plus en détail Speaker 0: Le sujet des opérations chirurgicales tranchants de Brigitte Macron est devenu de plus en plus viral en deux-mille-vingt-cinq lorsque la journaliste américaine Canès Owen a publié son émission d'investigation Beckhamon Buildget.

@BGatesIsaPyscho — Concerned Citizen

Posted - July 11, 2025 at 12:21 PM

Saved - July 11, 2025 at 6:35 PM

@BGatesIsaPyscho - Concerned Citizen

So turns out Brigitte Macron is a Man. Woman wins her case & is cleared of defamation based on evidence because she was right. But that’s only the start of this really weird story…… https://t.co/1HxzArffIi

@TCNetwork — Tucker Carlson Network

Posted - August 1, 2025 at 6:51 PM

Saved - August 4, 2025 at 9:54 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I shared some of Candace Owens' controversial beliefs, including her claims about Brigitte Macron, JFK's assassination, the Harvey Weinstein trial, and Michael Jackson. I invite you to check out her long-awaited interview on The Tucker Carlson Show for more insights into her views.

@TCNetwork - Tucker Carlson Network

Brigitte Macron is secretly a man. Israel killed JFK. The Harvey Weinstein trial was rigged. Michael Jackson was not a child molester. Candace Owens holds each of those beliefs, and she’s not afraid to admit it. What is her rationale? What else does she believe? Now is the chance to find out. We just released Candace’s long-awaited interview on The Tucker Carlson Show.

@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson

French President Emmanuel Macron is suing Candace Owens for claiming his wife was born a man. Candace joins us to present her evidence and explain why she’s looking forward to a legal battle. (0:00) Brigitte Macron and the Lawsuit Against Candace (12:06) The Origins of Candace’s Investigation Into the Macron Family (25:17) The Disgusting Truth About Brigitte and Emmanuel Macron’s Relationship (31:17) Why Are People Defending Sigmund Freud? (43:57) The Demonic Book Featured in President Macron’s Official Portrait (46:48) Why Candace Is Looking Forward to Trial (56:30) Emmanuel Macron’s Mysterious Backstory (1:01:01) Candace’s Interview With Nick Fuentes (1:05:28) Does Fuentes Have Ulterior Motives? (1:16:37) The Strange Attacks on “Christ Is King” (1:19:41) The Deranged Babylon Bee Guy (1:27:08) Candace’s Interview With Harvey Weinstein (1:37:26) Was Michael Jackson Innocent? (1:40:44) Why the Blake Lively Story Is Actually Important (1:44:56) Candace’s Investigation Into the Epstein Case (1:50:20) Morality, Truth, and Spiritual Warfare (1:57:57) Candace Reflects on Her Time at The Daily Wire (2:00:24) The Attempt on Candace’s Life (2:01:38) Candace’s Advice to President Trump (2:03:12) Candace’s Move to Catholicism Includes paid partnerships.

Video Transcript AI Summary

Candace Owens discusses Macron allegedly asking Trump to silence her and the subsequent lawsuit against her, claiming it's a PR strategy. The suit is based on claims she never made, and she believes the Macrons are trying to impoverish her for speaking the truth. She references a book that alleges Brigitte Macron doesn't exist and has been harassed by the French government. Owens says she offered the Macrons an opportunity to respond to the allegations before her series ran, but they refused to answer basic questions. She believes the Macrons are responding emotionally and out of fear. She also discusses the lawyers representing the Macrons, claiming they specialize in intimidation. Owens alleges that Emmanuel Macron was 14 when he met Brigitte, who was his teacher, and that his parents removed him from the school because of the relationship. She also claims that people in the Macrons' orbit have been found guilty of child molestation. She says she is not anti-Semitic, and that she is simply telling the truth. She also discusses Nick Fuentes, claiming he is dishonest and that she believes he is part of a campaign to discredit non-crazy right voices. She defends Harvey Weinstein and discusses the Epstein case, claiming Israel is controlling the government. She says she will never support Israel and that Jewish Americans should not support Israel. She advises Trump not to think he is smarter than his audience. She says her spiritual practice is Catholicism and that she has real faith.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: I'm so grateful that you're here. Thank you. Speaker 1: I'm so excited. Speaker 0: With child number four in tow, who's just off camera. What is going on with Macron? Speaker 1: I mean, it's the craziest thing that's ever happened certainly in my life. It's it's been repeatedly crazy from the Trump call to the lawsuit. I didn't even know Speaker 0: Can you just back up a little bit for those who don't know what you're referring to, the Trump call? What does that mean? Speaker 1: So I was called by Trump in February. Emanuel Macron had visited Trump, and I had done this series about it it was about his wife, Brigitte Macron. And the series got a lot of views, and Emanuel Macron personally flew to DC and asked Trump to ask me to shut up, to just stop speaking about his wife. Speaker 0: I was Did you know this was gonna rise to the level of international incident? Speaker 1: No. And and it's actually making me go back, and historically, I'm thinking, you know, all the times we were told that a war ended because of this or because of that, if this was one element of negotiation of Emmanuel Macron to Trump and the topic of why he was, you know, ostensibly there was to discuss the end of the Ukrainian and Russian war, But you're taking Trump aside, and you're asking him to shut off this podcaster in The US. I'm wondering if anything that we're told in our history books is real. Speaker 0: So so that is exactly right. I have wondered the same. That is just absolutely amazing. So he's a viewer. We know that. Speaker 1: He is a viewer. Him and his wife and their entire entourage, they watch every minute of my show. Trump certainly didn't. I know Trump, I think, stays much more in the mainstream media Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: In terms of watching what he watches. But Speaker 0: He must have been completely confused. Speaker 1: He sounded very confused. He said he was very confused when a leader of the leader of France Speaker 0: took him nuclear armed country. Mhmm. Speaker 1: During negotiations for Ukraine and Russia to inquire about whether or not he knew Candace Owens. And clearly, it was an emergency because it wasn't like Trump called me two days after or a week after. It wasn't like a, you know, a side conversation that, oh, let's take care of that. I was messaged by the intermediary hours after Macron left, maybe even an hour after Macron had left, and said, like, we need to get on the phone with you. Speaker 0: The president of The United States. Speaker 1: Well, first, the person said, somebody very close to the president The United States is asking me to ask you to stop talking about Brigitte's penis. And I Speaker 0: This is this is the true face of diplomacy. I love it. Speaker 1: True face of diplomacy. And I laughed because I said, okay. No. Bye. This seems ridiculous. Kinda didn't even I kind of questioned whether or not it was even true, but I like the person who called me very much, and I thought maybe I'm I'm just being a bit short there because I'm nine months pregnant, and I'm I'm or I was at the time, I think, or six months pregnant, and I and I tend to get short the more pregnant I become. And so I called him back, and I just said, can you explain to me what's really going on? And that individual told me that it was presented to him as a condition of ending the Russian Ukrainian war. Like, this was something that he brought up in the midst of these negotiations. That's how it was presented to me from a third party person. And then I was just completely floored, and I just took a second, looked at my husband, and the first thing we said to one another is no one will ever believe us. Yeah. Right. This is beyond the realm of things that could be plausible. Either gonna think I'm making myself and I'm lying. And even when I did eventually tell the story months later, people were were like, this there's no way that this could have happened. And until Trump didn't deny it, and then, of course, Emmanuel Macron is now suing me, and he included, as a part of a lawsuit, he he referred to that phone call and how he believes that presenting it as an element of the Ukraine Russian war was wrong. Like, he was, like and and so he's nitpicking there. But Speaker 0: So what is he suing you over? What does the suit claim? Speaker 1: Well, it claims a lot. It's 200 pages. Speaker 0: 200 pages? Speaker 1: 200 page pages. And what's really interesting is my series was based on a book. I worked with Xavier Poussard, is a journalist, a very credible journal journalist in France, who worked on the story for eight years and ended up having to move to Italy, move his family to Italy because of what Brigitte and her husband you know, France is a whole different political system. Speaker 0: Certainly is. Speaker 1: And they can just bring charges Speaker 0: against you. Country run completely by Macron, and they pretend that's not true, but it is true. Speaker 1: It is 1000% true. And so journalists that first got wise to the fact that Brigitte Macron kind of didn't exist for thirty years of her life were harassed by the government. They filed charges against them for, first and foremost, invasion of privacy. So there was never a dispute when she was bringing these charges about. She never brought a charge against people for saying that she was born a man, and that's what should be made clear to everybody. Like, that's not something that they're they ever say is not true when it comes down to the legality of it all, when it when they get into courtrooms. But they first sued for invasion of privacy, then they sued for defamation regarding a statement in error that the woman had made investigating when she said, in my opinion, you know, this document is fake. But that document actually was real. It was a birth certificate relating to somebody in the story. And so it was remarkably petty, and this is what they do. They get very legalistic. We'll keep you in the courtroom. We'll harass you. And for Xavier, things were happening where it was they made they wanted him to know they were following him Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: And that the Secret Service was keep keeping an eye on him. They never actually brought a suit against him until recently, the same time as mine. They're not suing him for defamation. Even though he's the author of the book that I based my entire series on, they are instead suing him for cyberbullying. Speaker 0: Cyberbullying ahead of state? Speaker 1: Mhmm. You can do that in Europe. Speaker 0: Just say because it's true that the French intelligence services everyone makes fun of France as incompetent and weak, but their intel services are not incompetent or weak. And after probably CIA, Massad, maybe the Russian intel services, they are feared. Speaker 1: Mhmm. And they should be feared. Speaker 0: They are feared. They are feared. They're competent. They're violent, documented they've killed people, and they're nothing to play with, really. Speaker 1: Right. That's why he picked up his family and he moved. Speaker 0: I get it. Speaker 1: And so it was this tremendous act of bravery that he did this, you know, putting not just his life on the line, the life of his wife and his children because the story here was so demented and so twisted. And just also the broader consideration that you could have an entire state colluding to protect a secret of that magnitude. And what's so compelling about this story, and I get into this in the first episode of Becoming Brigitte, is that by the time it it made its way to the English speaking world, people thought that this was like a, as always, far right conspiracy dug up from the trenches of Reddit, and that's not what happened at all. You know, the story begins with Emmanuel Macron and his wife is actually the journalists, the left leaning journalists, the Conde Nast journalists, who wanted to celebrate Brigitte. Yes. Wanted to do documentaries on Brigitte. This wonderful woman is is is is now empowered, and what is she gonna do? And they were kind of getting threatened. They were told to come to the Elysee Palace, and there was only one person that they could talk to. They were they couldn't find or verify anything about Brigitte's history or Brigitte's past, and they sort of fell down the hole and were like, I don't know why I suddenly feel like I've done something wrong for asking basic questions about the first lady of France. And so that's kind of where the series begins, and it kind of takes you through what they went through and what many people have gone through since just trying to learn anything about the first lady. Speaker 0: So to be clear, I it's an amazing story for so many reasons, but for the one that you just described that this was actually well known in France. It all took place in public, but I don't think more than a million Americans had any idea at all until your series came out. And the initial reaction to your series was, well, now we know Candace is insane. It's like, really going off the deep end. The wife's a man. Come on now. And then as the series progressed and became one of the biggest podcast series in the country and sort of sober people were saying, actually, you should listen to this. This is pretty this is pretty wild, pretty compelling. But I just wanna get to the lawsuit. So, like, they're suing they're not they're suing you for defamation. Speaker 1: For things that I never said, which is Right. They they know that this lawsuit this this is why I called it a a PR strategy. This lawsuit was filed for the press. Right? Because she just lost her defamation case against two journalists in France, and now everyone was reporting, wait. You said that this was the big case that proved or or you presented it as if you were suing them on this claim of you being a man or a woman, and now you've lost that in France. This is your home territory. What's going on? And so I think she called the lawyers and were like, just just file a lawsuit because it's very sloppy. The points run into one another. Like, first, they argue that I'm doing it for money, then they make the argument that I was fired for talk speaking about it. So that doesn't make any sense. It can't be both. And it's a bunch of stuff that I didn't say. They're they're behaving like mainstream journalists, where they'll take a couple of words that I said, like gangster, criminal and gangster, but then they add their own sentence to it. They're like, she accused her of being a criminal and a gangster. So it's very sloppy. And what they're doing is they they're just biding their time. They don't want the world to look, which this was a very bad mistake, a very bad way to go about it, but they want the world to believe that she has a claim against me. That the well, we're suing, therefore, you know, because this podcaster lied, but it's way too late. I mean, truly, it's it's everyone is aware of what's happened. This only made the series go viral. Now it's going viral in Asia. You know, I'm getting all of these emails from people in China, saying this series is going viral. They're not even on YouTube, so I don't know how they're watching it in China. But it was a mistake because, obviously, now people are going, okay. Something must be true. You know, a president of a foreign country does not sue a mom that does her podcast in her basement because she spoke something that was not true. Like, there's clearly something that they want hidden, and so everyone's taking a closer look at the series. Speaker 0: Yeah. That's not the way to hide things. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: The way to hide things is say, poor Candice, nice woman, obviously mentally ill. Mhmm. You know, come on now. Speaker 1: Mhmm. Speaker 0: That's that's the way to do it, and sophisticated liars do that. Right. So it is interesting. They are they're responding in a way that clearly is driven by emotion and fear. It I mean, that's my read. I I don't really know why they're responding, of course, but looking at it is it's so interesting. You may have noticed this is a great country with bad food. Our food supply is rotten. It didn't used to be this way. Take chips for example. You may recall a time when crushing a bag of chips didn't make you feel hungover, like you couldn't get out of bed the next day. And the change, of course, is chemicals. There's all kinds of crap they're putting in this food that should not be in your body, seed oils, for example. Now even one serving of your standard American chip brand can make you feel bloated, fat, totally passive and out of it. But there is a better way. It's called masa chips. They're delicious. Got a whole garage full of them. They're healthy. They taste great, and they have three simple ingredients, corn, salt, and a 100% grass fed beef tallow. No garbage, no seed oils. What a relief, and you feel the difference when you eat them as we often do. Snacking on masa chips is not like eating the garbage that you buy at convenience stores. You feel satisfied, light, energetic, not sluggish. Tens of thousands of happy people eat masa chips. It's endorsed by people who understand health. It's well worth a try. Go to masa, masachips.com/tucker. Use the code Tucker for 25% off your first order. That's masachips.com Tucker. Code Tucker for 25% off your first order. Highly recommended. Speaker 1: And there is something also that the way that they're going about this, going after the journal journalists, thinking that America is is the same sort of a beast as France is, and that while we have said that you can't ask us any questions, we'll sue you for cyber bill bullying, there is something Speaker 0: Cyber bullying. Speaker 1: Cyber bullying, whatever whatever the claims are here. But there is something about it where once you really arrive at a truth, what I find the reaction is for the people that are incensed by the fact that you're presenting that truth is I'll impoverish you. Yeah. And I've seen this over and over again. It's like, okay, she told the truth, but our response to that is gonna be demands that she get fired. Right? She should lose her livelihood for speaking the truth. She should lose and that's why Jake Tapper I don't know if you've seen it, you probably haven't because it's Jake Tapper. But he sits down with Tom Claire, who was a lawyer on this case, and Jake Tapper is doing the absolute most to make this just the easiest interview for Tom Claire. He's sitting across from him, and he's like, she's deranged, and she's crazy, and she's a conspiracy theorist. So much so Speaker 0: Jake Tapper said that. Speaker 1: Jake Tapper, but so much so that people in the comments were like, nah, I wanna watch the series. His own viewers thought this was just so over the top. But then he turns to Tom Claire and he asks him like a basic question. He's like, you know, what evidence did you present to her that Brigitte's a man? And Tom Claire can't answer the question. He's like, we, you know, we there was a you can read the claims. It's we it's extensive, and, you know, we told her that she was a woman. They never presented any evidence. We went to them before we published the series. We were in touch with Tom Claire, Claire and Locke. We sent them a list of questions. We said, look. We won't even do this series if you answer these basic circle yes or no questions. Was Brigitte Macron the first lady, born a woman? I mean, that basic of questions. Did she ever live as a person named Veronique before the transition temporarily Brigitte lived as a a person named Veronique? They refused to answer these yes or no questions. Obviously, if you're gonna prove actual malice, you have to you you have to present to the court, which is it's obviously a very high bar that's been set, which I don't necessarily even agree with that bar, by the way, New York Times versus Sullivan set. But, obviously, you have to prove that I acted, and I knew the truth and I acted. Speaker 0: That's exactly right. Speaker 1: I was desperate to get to the truth and said I would stop doing this series. We also offered for me to get on a plane and fly to France to interview to get Brigitte's side of this. You know, I've I I wanna make sure I'm not colored by having red becoming Brigitte and and reading the series. There could be another side, and it was essentially a big f you and said, Tom Claire comes back. She doesn't have to answer your question. She that doesn't have to prove to you. Speaker 0: Should they retain Tom Clare and Libby Lock then, or Tom Clare. So Tom Clare and Libby Lock are married, second marriage for him, but I I know them. And they have a law firm, I believe, in Suburban DC and Virginia, and that specializes in making people shut up through intimidation. Speaker 1: They Speaker 0: tried it with me, and in a really brutal, cruel way, I would say, to try and just scare you into shutting up. So that itself, I don't think anyone regards Tom Claire as a good lawyer at all. But certainly, you know, his behavior is designed to intimidate you. So the fact that they hired them at the outset, that's the behavior of someone who just, like, wants to scare you into shutting up. Speaker 1: Mhmm. And I the timing of when they first sent us a letter was actually December sorry. The November. We missed the letter because they sent it to a inbox that we would have never been checking. It was a very weird inbox, like, where you would go to return a t shirt. And we because we missed that, and I'm glad I missed it because I probably would have been scared, I think they knew, because that was right when I began speaking with Xavier Poussard. And I was in London at the time, and I had agreed to interview him, but nobody knew I was gonna do this interview. So what made them suddenly send this intimidating letter? Speaker 0: And Tom Clare sent it? Speaker 1: Tom Clare sent it. Speaker 0: They'd already retained him. Speaker 1: They had retained him, and he sent the letter, and I think that they were monitoring Xavier Poussard. Think I they were monitoring either his communications or monitoring Speaker 0: him of Milton. Speaker 1: That he was flying to London to sit down to an interview with me, and they sent it just a week before I sat down with him. Speaker 0: Well, keep in mind, the subject of your story controls some of the most competent intel services in the world. Correct. Correct. As a head of state, there are no rules Mhmm. At all Mhmm. Which is enough to make you a little uncomfortable if you think about it. Yeah. And the fact that they would hire those two lawyers by the way, his wife, Libby Locke, is Bill Ackman's lawyer who Ackman uses to make people shut up Speaker 1: Interesting. Speaker 0: By sending hysterical letters, screechy letters threatening to destroy you if you keep talking about the client. I mean, it's really thuggish. Let's just go but can we just go through, like, chronologically how this unfolded? So at the core of the story is the allegation that Brigitte Macron is not who she says she is, and that would include her sex. Is not what she says it is. Speaker 1: Correct. That she was born a man named Jean Michel Trognault. And I'm aware, if you have not watched the series, that sounds crazy because that was me when I first saw the headline. Speaker 0: Yes. No. No. I mean, I Speaker 1: I was alerted to it by the Daily Mail. I thought it was such a crazy insane headline, but it was the Daily Mail had done this had published an article saying that with a video of Emmanuel Macron denying claims his wife was a man, and I just thought that's really funny. Like, what could possibly be going on in France that the president has to deny a claim that his wife's a man? But something that caught my eye was just as Reza reading this article, they made no effort to debunk it. Like, it was sort of like it was that typical CNN, New York Times. It's so crazy. It's it's like, okay. But if it's so crazy, just, you know, post some photos of her. Obviously, she's got three kids. There's gonna be tons of photos of her raising her children. There's nothing. They had one solitary photo. And when you look at the photo, it was very obvious, and this is before I got into the details, that she looks a lot more like the little boy that's on the left than she does who they were trying to purport was the little girl that was sitting on the family member's lap. And so I got into it kind of very organically. I was like, this is weird. Like, what's going on in France that the president has to make a comment on the situation? And then I I found a website where it explained it, and I instantly realized there is something here. Like, you just you don't have any photos of yourself for thirty years of your life, and the the two photos that you've given have been given to the public from a woman who has quite literally been charged with forging documents. She's I mean, she's a thug. Mean, Mimi Marshawn, they had to eventually get rid of her. Forging documents, thuggery, things of that nature, of a criminal nature. She's the only one everyone's gonna go through her to get any information about your past. This is so strange. I mean, it's so kooky that you wouldn't just the defense of this is just, hey. Could you show us any pictures of your living for these thirty years? You know, you had allegedly three children. Do you guys take any photos while you were raising them, maybe when you were in the hospital? No. No. No. No, Tucker. They there's there's nothing there. Speaker 0: So it's an it's an amazing allegation, a stunning allegation, a bewildering allegation. But I think the legal and the moral question is, did you give an opportune did you give the prime minister and his wife an opportunity, the McCrones, the opportunity to respond to the allegation before the series ran? So that's my question. Speaker 1: Weeks to respond. In Speaker 0: what way did you do that? Did you call them? Did you Speaker 1: Via Tom Claire. It was their lawyer. So it was it actually they kind of made a mistake. They messaged us first to kind of intimidate us and say, you know, I don't you're working on this thing or you're taught know? Speaker 0: Did they say how they knew you were working on it? Speaker 1: I don't I I am not clear because what was interesting is they in that first letter, they included claims of what I said while I was working at The Daily Wire. That was the previous March. So you're responding to something that I said in March. We're now in December. So what triggered you? Like, it clearly had to have been that I had just interviewed Xavier Broussard, and they were aware of it. So then they said, okay. Send her out a letter to intimidate her. And, obviously, getting a letter for most people, you get a letter from a sitting president of France, you're gonna go, okay. Well, I'm just gonna be quiet and not say anything more because I don't wanna get involved in this. But for me, it just made me even more curious. And so to be sure, I said, well, I'm glad we have a lot of communication established because I'm certainly not interested in defaming you. I'm not interested in lying. Obviously, I would do myself a disservice if all of this was complete crap, and it turned out that I had been peddling it. So here are my questions. Very simple. Yes or no questions. Did you ever live as Veronique? Who is Jean Michel Trucke? No. Refused to answer. They just instantly got. Speaker 0: So so you presented the allegations then, which they, of course, were aware of, people had made, others, not you, that she's not really who she says she is. And you said, can you explain? Speaker 1: Yeah. And and, honestly, didn't require much of an explanation. We also asked, can you give us any photos of you living through this three year period? I mean, pretty easy stuff. If you're actually concerned and you're gonna pretend you're so traumatized and defamed because of this story, I would have been like, yeah. Of course. Here I am. Here's me in middle school. Here's me on a cheerleading team. Here's me the first day I held my first son. Here's me it's it's such an easy thing to debunk that it requires the suspension of common sense to believe that this is a conspiracy theory because it's just it's so easy debunk, and yet they refuse to do it. And they're being extremely petty and going after every single person that speaks about it. Speaker 0: Now Have they ever provided that that evidence to anybody? Speaker 1: No. That's the point. They haven't. Speaker 0: To this day? Speaker 1: They would have never had to sue anybody because everyone would have then laughed at them. Like, if someone was working on a story saying that I lived as a man for thirty years, I don't need to lawyer up. I want you to publish that story so that I can then come out and say, this person is a psychopath. Clearly, here is the trove of me growing up with my sisters. Here's my middle school yearbook. To the contrary, even when Xavier Poussard, because he has been worked on this for ten years and therefore filing paperwork with the government to get pictures, Jean Michel Trogano has a military file. He also filed to get Brigitte's school yearbook where she's allegedly has a picture, and he won that case and then took it to Sacre Coeur, which is Sacred Heart, and they said, we're not releasing it. I don't care if you won the case. We're refusing to release this to you. So in every regard, something that would be able to dispel this from her, even her children, where are your kids in this? If that's my mom and she's so attacked and it's so horrifying that she's gotta put, you know, my dad, stepdad on a plane to go speak to the president The United States way before then, I would have released pictures of me and my mom. Her kids are all adults. I would have said, here's me and my mom growing up on my first birthday, my second birthday. Please, everyone, leave her alone. They won't do it. It it's just it's bonkers to think. Speaker 0: Kids spoken in public? Speaker 1: Only one child has ever spoken and called the rumors crazy and upsetting, and that's her youngest daughter, Tafon. And I have a theory about why why that is, but, again, there's no evidence. And since you supplied, Tafon won't go under oath. Tafon won't speak. Tafon won't say, oh, no. This is she just says it's it's very hurtful and it's not true. And okay, Tafon, well, you have the power to dispel this by just releasing some photos of you growing up. You're you're a 40 year old lawyer. It's been pretty simple to release some photos of you as a kid with your mom, and they won't do it. Speaker 0: Here's a revealing and unpleasant fact. Mexico is facing a dangerous outbreak of new world screwworm. Screwworm is a flesh eating parasite. It's devastating to livestock and humans. Despite this, the Department of Agriculture has reopened foreign livestock imports including from Mexico. Does that sound wrong to you? Does it sound revolting? Well, yeah. Our friends at Merriweather Farms agreed. They sounded the alarm or could clearly be a serious threat to your health, and it worked. After Merriweather's campaign, agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins suspended Mexican livestock imports until we can certain that our food supply and our citizens are safe, including from screwworm. So the story tells a lesson, and it asks an obvious question. Why should you rely on untrustworthy foreign beef to feed your nation? The answer is that you shouldn't rely on it. If you agree, we hope you'll support Meriwether Farms. In a time when so many are selling out, they have the courage to stand up for what is right, and all of their meat comes from this country, The United States. We know because we eat it every single day. Visit Meriwether Farms, m e r I w e t h e r, farms.com/tucker. Use the code Tucker for 15% off your first order. Real meat, real values, and it's delicious. So if so it sounds like, from what you've said, you don't believe this case was even designed to go forward. No. They're not planning on a courtroom showdown here. Speaker 1: No. And there's no way. By the way, I engaged with Libby Locke and Tom Claire a long time ago about defamation, and they told me not to go after it because the bar was so high. And I had a very clear case where someone told a blatant lie about me, which we would've which we happily countered right away. Speaker 0: You've dealt with them before. Speaker 1: Yeah. Oh, I have emails from this is the funny part. I have emails from them. I love you, adore you, watch your show. Speaker 0: They're totally soulless, both of them. Speaker 1: Yeah. Clearly. Yes. The motive here is money, which is fine if that's what you want your legacy to be, because at the core of this case, which most people should be speaking about, is their defense here is I'm I am admitting, which they've never done before, and they're now admitting that Emmanuel Macron was only 14 when they met, when he was in that play. 15, she says, whenever this affair happened. And in my suit, they admit that Emmanuel Macron's parents took him away from the school because of this relationship. Do you understand how the the audacity of I'm a creep, I'm mocked on a student at best, and I have the audacity to file this lawsuit? I mean, what is going on in France that you would so willfully put that in a lawsuit, which by the way debunks their earlier claims when he was first running, the press said he was 17. Then when Xavier Poussar proved that that wasn't true, then suddenly we're saying he was 16. Now we've got them writing that he was 15. But the truth is is that Emmanuel Macron was 14, and they can't go back on that truth because she has Isn't that child molestation? There we go. That's another big thing happening here. She's desperate now to keep it at 15, but she wants to keep it at 15. No. He was 14 when he was in that play that she says that she watched him in, as you know, fourteen year old boys. I guess as a 40 year old woman, you would just be so swept away by a 14 year old child on stage. He was in this play. I'm forgetting the name of it. It's a French name. Mila Kundera's play. And that's when she alleges that she saw him and it and he just was ahead of his time, a savant, so brilliant in his demonstration, his ability to act that and this Speaker 0: He's a he's a little kid. Speaker 1: He's a child. He's a child, and this is a very creepy, sadistic story. And the more that you learn how much the press lied about that earlier story, I mean, even the press in the beginning, when he was running, even said that Brigitte Macron was this, like, irresistibly hot teacher. Like, they kept comparing her to Claudia Schiffer. And then when Xavier and these journalists got documents and and, like, you know, pictorial evidence of what Brigitte looked like at that time, she looked like a man in the middle of a transition. You know? And so even that I mean, the way the press lied to sell this creepy relationship is something that could should concern everyone, whether you believe she's a man or not. What you have is a couple that is willfully getting away with, at best, like, molestation, sexual perversion She runs the deviance, she runs Speaker 0: the This is not some random guy. Mm-mm. Oh, that's Yep. And that's not in dispute. Speaker 1: No. That's not it it was in dispute because they tried to to at first say that he was 17. Now she's saying 15. The truth is, Imana Melchrom was 14. Speaker 0: I'll just go with 15 and say that's wrong. Speaker 1: Yeah. Right? Do we even need to Speaker 0: Well, mean, I mean, that's a whole different thing. Speaker 1: And that was the comments under Jake Tapper's interview with Tom Claire, people, and this is the left, this is his show, were outraged. They were going, how could you defend this? I asked the question to Tom Claire on my show as I unpacked all of the child molestation that surrounds them. It's an entire orbit of people who have been found guilty and have openly admitted to molesting their children. These are their friends. Okay? That's why she's angry because I'm like, it's and it's not just them. It's this guy, this guy, this guy. He funded the campaign then had to come out and say, yes. I molested my my stepson, and and the stepdaughter wrote a book about it. A person admitted to that. Speaker 0: And These are friends of the Mercos? Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. They're a current lawyer, okay, who was the finance minister. Brigitte handpicked him to be the finance minister of France. His name is Eric Dupont Moretti. This was my episode two days ago. Of course, because everyone in their orbit just, I don't know, has a a interesting pedophilia story. Speaker 0: Do you have any friends who are pedophiles? Speaker 1: None. It's a they just can't stop finding friends that are somehow involved in these crazy pedophilia scandals, and Eric Tupon Moretti made a name for himself as the lawyer that comes in on behalf of the offending in this case, it's it's almost always incest, by the way, in all the cases that he involves himself in. And he convinces the court, as he did in one certain case called the Manichea affair, that, okay, yeah, it is incest. Yeah. He's been raping his daughter, but, and this is what he's famous for, it's happy incest. And he sold to a court and got this guy's sentence reduced. He had been raping two of his daughters. Speaker 0: Come on. Speaker 1: I'm not kidding. You could look this up on Wikipedia, no less. And and he sold this to the court, coined the phrase along with another person who, another lawyer whom, Emmanuel awarded the Medal of Freedom to. And they said to the court in Amian, which is where Brigitte and Emmanuel are both born, that you you should release this guy because he he loves his daughter, now she's 21. And so it doesn't really matter. And and honestly, it's the mom's fault. He they encouraged them to all sleep together, and so they did. They released him early, and then his daughter tried to escape him, and he killed her. So this is this is who everyone this is the guy who's on the news channels right now saying, we're gonna go after Candace Owens because this is a state affair, and he's got this whole glorious story about how I'm being funded by Russia. Because it's always Russia, as we all know. It's gotta be Russia. Speaker 0: Funded by Russia? Speaker 1: His his theory was so feels like Speaker 0: the the kind of end stage of something. Yep. I hate the phrase global elite because it sounds so spooky or whatever, but that's what it is. Speaker 1: The depraved. I don't even call them the the elite. They're the depraved, and they've they've just been running the game for so long that they're not even getting creative anymore. Speaker 0: But there's always a part of town with depraved people. Like, they're you know, every society has the depraved, the depraved community. But has there been since Rome really a a whole class of depraved people with this much power? That's that's what gets Speaker 1: I think so. Yeah. The more that I study and the more that I take a look at this picture because at first, you know, you go through this period where you're going, am I crazy, or are they all defending, like, children being raped? Like, this can't be this can't be right. Like, somebody's gonna stand up and say something. And the only thing that you can do in those moments where you're questioning whether or not this could be the circumstance is to educate yourself further. Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: And I find that whatever area they have sort of an inordinate response to, where they're, like, getting very angry about something that seems so simple, is probably where you should press your thumb the hardest. And I did this with, like, Sigmund Freud. I kinda said something on my show about how, like, Sigmund Freud was like a pervert and getting into children incest, his whole theory, blaming the children for their parents being incestuous. And the reaction across the the press, like, dare she? I'm like, he's dead. Why are you defending this guy? Speaker 0: Not American. Speaker 1: Did present a theory that these children who were being raped by, you know, by their fathers were actually attracted to them. Why are you defending this? And then I got educated about it and started reading books and stunned. Like, yes. It this is this is actually something that he was doing, and I learned this from the person who controlled the Sigmund Freud archives who wrote this amazing book called The Assault on Truth. But is there is this common thread that it brings you back to Paris every time, whether you're talking about Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, talking about Emmanuel Macron and and Brigitte, you're talking about Sigmund Freud. He studied and then came up with this theory while he was studying under Charcot in Paris that actually, even though we see all this evidence that these kids are being raped, it is their fault because they're attracted to their fathers. And for this guy who rang the alarm on this, like, years later, he was working with Anna Freud, and he was in control of the archives. His name is Jeffrey Maison. He got kicked out of the archives for telling the truth. Speaker 0: Very, very famous case. Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. He got kicked out. And but he wrote the book still because he still had the letters. He published the letters to prove that Sigmund Freud knew for a fact these kids were being raped. Speaker 0: Boy, was he attacked boy, was he attacked for that too. Speaker 1: But here's what's interesting about that. He he publishes that book, The Assault on Truth, and Anna allowed him to because she could have stopped the book, and Anna Freud chose not to stop the book. I think she wanted the secret to be out. But you you go through these stories, and over and over again, you get this theme of of this very dark theme of children that are being raped. Right? And it's incestuous. But like I said, while they're talking about Jeffrey Epstein, like, why do we keep coming back to this theme, and why does it seem that the media is colluding to cover that up? Like, I thought no matter where we were on the spectrum, left or right, when it came to children, whether it's murder, rape, like, we all were on the same page that, like, we have to defend innocent lives. And so then you have to press further and go, what is the theology here? Because everything, as my husband has taught me, is a theology. They're being guided by a theology. And while the rest of the world is being driven towards either being agnostic or being outwardly atheistic, I think the people that are in control are are being pulled by. Speaker 0: Oh, they're not atheists. Speaker 1: They're not atheists at all. Speaker 0: Oh, I couldn't agree more. It's interesting. One of my children, one of my smarter children, said to me today, actually, said, child molestation is the only crime with no justification. And I'd had never thought of it that way. And it's like murder, of course you know, murder's wrong. Of course, there's plenty of circumstances where I can imagine committing murder and going to hell for it. But, I mean, I can imagine, you know, getting so mad that I shoot somebody or you know Speaker 1: what I mean? Mhmm. Mhmm. Speaker 0: Stealing, lying, but it's not possible to imagine a justification for molesting a child for being sexual with a child. And it's also not possible to imagine for all the sins that I can imagine committing in a certain circumstance, like, that's just I can't even get my head around it. That's just not appealing in any way. Like, you'd never even think of wanting to do that. So it's gotta be spiritual. You don't wanna be passive and tired and dependent, do you? Of course, you don't. You wanna be strong and self sufficient. That's the goal and our friends at Beam can help you. They understand that real strength does not come from drugs. It comes from inside you, internal motivation, internal strength, health. That's the key. Vigor. So we partner with Beam because they have the same values that we have, that Americans have hard work, accountability, free will, independence. Be strong, don't be dependent. Not until you're really old anyway. Beam can help you achieve that. This great US company is offering our listeners a new bundle, the American Strength Bundle, and it comes with top selling creatine and protein powder that delivers what your body needs to perform, to recover, and to stay strong. No junk at all. All natural ingredients that actually taste good. You will love it. You can get 30% off this bundle at shopbeam.com/tucker. This is not in stores. Just on that page for people who listen to this podcast only. They're encouraging you to be weak. Don't let them. Go to shopbeam.com/tucker for 30% off. Speaker 1: It is spiritual for them, and that's why studying Sigmund Freud, and I I realized why they were so triggered when I kind of I'm always accidentally lands on something and then there's just like this reaction. Yeah. And like, can't do that. And then I go, okay. Well, I better learn about that because there's something you don't want me to know, and so now I'm curious. If they would just leave me alone, I I promised. I I wouldn't even have come down this path. But what you learn about Sigmund Sigmund Freud is that what he actually mainstreamed I mean, the psychoanalytic movement was quite literally a movement to mainstream gaslighting, and this is no question. Like I said, you can read Sigmund Freud's archives. This guy was not a guy theorizing this that this is what was going on. He had access, learned German, read the archives, alerted Anna Freud, and was like, hey. Did you know your dad knew that these kids were being raped and that he lied to the public? And she's like, yeah. I think, you know, please maybe don't publish that, but then she she let him publish it. And I think that was a cry for help, but that's that's my theory. Anyways, the second book to read was once you get to that and you go, what is this guiding theology? Why did Sigmund Freud at first acknowledge as he did openly that all of these kids were being raped because he was at the morgue. Some of these kids were dying because of their their injuries. And he was at the morgue in Paris. He saw this upfront. There was no dispute. The literature has been published. He's studying under Charcot, then he does this pivot suddenly when he turns 35. And he says, never mind. These kids are not these kids are not being abused. They're they're attracted to their fathers. Speaker 0: They're the sexual provocateurs. Speaker 1: David Bacchan published a book, and he relates it to and he makes a very sound argument, and then proves his theory that it's the it's called Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition. And he relates to he relates it to the Kabbalah, this sort of gnostic idea that you have to descend into hell, and then you'll be brought up. And, like, the worst thing that you could possibly do, the worst sin, they believe in this idea of holy sin, is to harm a child. Now, again, these people that I'm citing, just because I know that you start talking about Sigmund Freud and, ah, antisemitism, These people who wrote these books are both Jewish. Jeffrey Masson is Jewish. He's an astronaut Jew. David Bacchan is an astronaut Jew. These people are professors, and, you know, they have their credentials here to make these conclusions. And what he theorizes in this book is that Sigmund Freud was mainstreaming the Kabbalah through cycle cycle analytics. And the reason why he waited until he was 35, as he explains, is that in the Kabbalah tradition, they don't they think it's so powerful, whatever the Kabbalah is. And I'm not educated on the Kabbalah, will admit that. But whatever it is, they don't tell their kids about it until they turn 35. And when Sigmund Freud was 35, he received a Hebrew Bible from his father. And it's like, I guess they believe in numerology, whatever it is, and he was suddenly awakened to whatever aspect of the Kabbalah that it was. After David Bacon published the book, a rabbi came to him. He got in touch with the rabbi and and spoke to this rabbi who told him that, yes, Sigmund Freud was a kabbalist because he had he knew him personally, and he had a Zohar in his apartment or in his in his place, and he then verified that his theory, as reading through his papers, was correct and that he was a kabbalist. And so I think it's important for people, as I started a book club, to read these books. Like, don't take it from me, and and I always say, yeah, we need to stop falling for this credentialism. You shouldn't listen to me because I'm canonist. I have a podcast. I want you to read these same books and to recognize that something very wrong is happening in this world. And when we point to these facts, we're all being gaslit. Like, we're suddenly being told that having a response, that's just one example to right now, to, like, kids dying in Gaza makes us monsters. Sigmund Well, Freud is the person that introduced the idea of sort of this that gaslighting could be an effective strategy. Speaker 0: And gaslighting, as I understand it, is the process of inverting blame. Speaker 1: Mhmm. Speaker 0: So I punch you in the face and attack you for assaulting me. Mhmm. Kendra, you hit me. Right. So Speaker 1: And it feels like we're constantly being gaslit Speaker 0: right now. Does feel like there's an awful lot of blame shifting. I see it in a very different context based on economics. It's like, you know, the the working class in The United States has been, like, completely under assault. It's not accidental. They were kind of targeted for extinction and treated with maximum contempt, and then they're, like, blamed for their medieval attitudes or racist or whatever. It's like, no. Actually, I think they're the ones who aren't winning. They seem to be losing out in a deal that is making a lot of other people rich. Why are we attacking them? Speaker 1: Well, then you get called a racist. Right? You get called a racist for noticing that. And these people who are like, I just wanna be able to feed my families and go to work and feel good about this. Speaker 0: It has nothing to do with race. Like, how did race become part of this? It's like, what? Speaker 1: But that's an element of that. And one of the things to to recognize about Freud is that so the Freud family creates a psychoanalytic movement, Sigmund Freud does, and and they're gaslighting people. But then that turns into modern propaganda because that it's the Freud Bernays family. It's the same family. Edward Bernays is the person that created propaganda during World War two, the OSS. Like, they were using him to figure out how can we mainstream like, how can we convince an entire population to wanna go to war, you know, to hate Germans? This is the guy that they brought in. So it's the same like, the psychoanalytic movement then turns into propaganda with Edward Bernays and then turns into PR. Like, the biggest PR person in the world right now is still the Freud family. The the Freud family are the PR for the royals. His name is Matthew Freud. So you can draw a direct line in understanding that these Speaker 0: Matthew Freud was married Rupert Murdoch's daughter. Speaker 1: That is true. That is correct. Mhmm. And so it's very interesting to Speaker 0: Just just noting. Speaker 1: Yeah. And it and it's important for people to recognize this, though. These people have had a tremendous head start. Okay? They know how the mind works. They have run these experiments on people. They have had this relationship with the state forever. In fact, think they are the state, if I'm being honest. They are the state. I shouldn't even say it's relationship with the state. And what they are constantly trying to do is to infect your mind. Okay? So picture you being that, you know, child who lived through this horrific experience, and now you have an adult sitting before you and saying that never happened, and you're crazy, and what's wrong with you is that you're, like, attracted to your dad. That's what they're doing to all of us in a in a certain way. Obviously, way more devastating when it happens to a child in in that regard, in that sinister regard. But when you see the mainstream media apparatus today, and they're gaslighting us, like, the the the case Brigitte Macronis, the most gaslighting I've ever seen in my life, where it's just like, you could debunk for us in one second, but you won't. And you're calling us deranged, and you're calling us crazy, and you're calling us anti Semitic for caring about a dead Palestinian kid, and you're it's like, this is yeah. They created this system, and the only way that we're gonna be able to defeat it is we have to fur we have to first understand it. And that's why I really encourage people to get educated. And I just made it my point, because I constantly kept getting this claim, like, anti Semitic talk about Sigmund Freud. So I was like, you know what I'm gonna do? I'm only gonna read Israeli historians, and and I'm only gonna read Jewish books, books that are written by Jewish authors so that we can just go ahead and dispel the rumor. Speaker 0: Heard that, but it's it's interesting. Sigmund Freud has gone in and out of style. Well, he was very in style when I was young, and then Speaker 1: And for me, he was very in style. Speaker 0: Yes. And then he was really knocked off the pedestal by feminists, as I recall, because he had, like, some nonfashionable views on women and calling them hysterical, etcetera, etcetera. But I don't recall Sigmund Freud being, like, a protected figure since when is criticizing him a hate crime? Speaker 1: That's what was so weird to me. I did one episode on The Daily was Speaker 0: a religious guy, at least. Speaker 1: Exactly. I did one episode, and I was speaking about also all of his friends. His best friend was this guy, Wilhelm Fleis, who his son came out, Robert Fleis, and said, my my son I mean, my father sexually assaulted me. Everyone surrounding him was, like, sexually assaulting their children in Vienna, which is Speaker 0: Again, what is that? I mean, I feel like I've been everywhere. I know a ton of people. I've never met anyone who's been accused of molesting his own child. That is so far out. Speaker 1: He just Speaker 0: I've known people who've done every bad thing, and I've never met anybody who's even been accused of that. And yet you're describing two clusters of people Mhmm. Powerful people, famous people, where, like, tons of people in the orbit have been accused of or have, in fact, committed child molestation. Speaker 1: Well, let me just tell you, as you get into as you get into my series, like, as I point to all these this orbit around them of everyone who just keeps accidentally committing pedophilia, defending pedophilia, whatever it is, The best part is, for me, that they kind of laugh in your face that they want you to know that there's some there's an element of it that's partially sadistic. Presidential portrait, Emmanuel Macron leaning against a desk. Everybody has to do this leaning against a desk, obviously, the official presidential portrait. He chooses to put a book, and he has in multiple interviews said the anticipated author, by Andre Giede on the table. Andre Giede is an author who admitted openly that he was a pedophile. He's a pederast. He specifically only actually molests little boys, and he would go down to Algeria, Morocco, and he would write books based on his experiences. The president of France chose to put that book, okay, an Andre Giede book on his desk for his official presidential portrait. Like, there was no other book that you could have picked to put there. There's an element of it where they I think that they've amassed so much power, And it's quite interesting because I I think maybe Daryl Cooper told you about this, but getting into Bill Barr's father, Donald Barr Yes. Who wrote that weird book Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: The space it's called space something space relations by Donald Barr, where he predicts a colony of Khosars, as he calls them, Khosars, k o s s a r s, he spells it, that are so bored with their power. They're so bored with being elite, just getting away with everything. You know? And he then predicts kind of in this fantasy book, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's very strange got it, and he also was, you know, in the OSS, which was a precursor for the CIA. But there's an element of that when I see Emmanuel Macron engaging in that, that it's like they wanna get caught, and they just have so much power that they know there's never gonna be any consequences for it where you go, why would you do this? You could have put any other book on your desk. You could have put literally any other book on your desk, but you chose a self admitted, never denied the fact that he would go down to Morocco, and he just was into little he was into little boys. Speaker 0: So we're the nicotine business. We make Alp pouches, and they're delicious. But one thing about nicotine, it is regulated by the federal government up one side and down the other, and the main thing you can't do no matter how much scientific evidence exists is make a health claim about nicotine. So we don't. But that is not true with caffeine. Caffeine is good for you. So we've come up with a better way to use caffeine. It's called Coffee Break. It's designed for people who want to think clearly, move quickly, never miss a beat. It is delicious and it's strong and is best paired with an Alp. Roll out of bed and start your day on the most vigorous possible note. Ready to dominate. Each XL pouch hits with fifty milligrams of caffeine. And since there's no nicotine, we can ship this to your home in all 50 states. Grab yours now, coffee break, at alppouch.com. So this is all of everything that you've said for the past twenty minutes makes me think they'd be crazy to bring this to trial because that would allow you discovery. Speaker 1: I think they're banking on us dismissing it. I think one of two options Speaker 0: What does that mean? Speaker 1: You can at first file to dismiss the case because you're going, hi. It's we have the First Amendment right. This is crazy. It's it's it's coming from Paris. I mean, like, why on earth would we honor this at all? Secondly, it's like, are we really gonna allow the French president to come in here and, like, stifle my my right to speech? And, typically, in a normal scenario, judge would dismiss this case because it's it's completely crazy. And we can obviously then produce the evidence that we ask them these questions, and they chose not to reply to them for whatever reason. I think they want us to dismiss it. And again, I'm guessing just so they can say, oh, well, we tried. But, you know, America has its own beast, they have actual malice. Or they are going to pretend that Brigitte died from grief. I don't know. I don't because clearly, they're not gonna go through Discovery. Right? If you were gonna go through Discovery, you would have just published pictures a long time ago and put it into all the rumors. Right? Because then you're gonna you're gonna have to give me proof of this thirty year period where you just kind of Speaker 0: So you're not gonna try to have the case dismissed. Speaker 1: I certainly do not wanna have a case dismissed. Yeah. I've never heard of before. Having these discussions. Speaker 0: I wanna blinger on this for a moment having been around a lot of lawsuits. I've never heard anybody sued, particularly this is they're spending a lot of money on this because Tom Claire and his wife have big expenses, they I think they charge a lot. I've never heard anybody say, I don't want a well funded case against me to be dismissed. Speaker 1: It's how I feel, and the reason that I feel that way truly, Tucker, is because Speaker 0: Are you being Speaker 1: serious. So much bigger. You know? And we're so we're having those discussions. We've spoken to the lawyer. We want it moved to Tennessee. They filed some Delaware. What's happening here is so much bigger and much more important for the world. Speaker 0: Delaware, really. Speaker 1: Yeah. Which is interesting. You know, Hunter kind of notoriously said, like, we control the courts in Delaware. But Speaker 0: this Fox News found out absurd case against Fox News by Dominion. I was not named in them. I got sucked into it. But Tom Claire was involved in that case, and it was in Delaware. And they just had a completely compliant judge. It was just a joke Speaker 1: Yeah. Actually. Well well, that's very interesting because they did file in Delaware, and it is a place where we know that the courts are corrupt. But this would be a a kind of precedent that would be, I think, almost even too crazy for Delaware. You're talking about a sitting president of another country coming in and saying, I'm I'm gonna sue you for telling the truth. We have truth on our side. Right? We actually have truth. So unless he's gonna say, blah blah blah, I'm not looking at anything, and you're not you're gonna get no discovery, and we're just gonna award this person. I mean, you you gotta give the other side discovery. Right? Speaker 0: How does Macron collect as a foreign head of state, how does he collect? Speaker 1: This is there is nothing that we can look at. We are pioneering this, obviously, because this has never happened in the history of the world that a sitting president of a foreign country has sued a journalist and then a podcaster in another country. It just it's never happened. So we don't know. I didn't even know how it how we could sue, actually. I thought that you could only sue in a I I just am learning with everybody else Speaker 0: That's amazing. Speaker 1: How this is going to work. But, speaking of Tom Claire and Dominion, as he was sitting up there giddy with Jake Tapper as these representatives of, like, the state, because that's who they represent. Represent the state. And the state doesn't Speaker 0: agree. They always represent the state. Speaker 1: They're giddy talking about Dominion. Because Jake Tapper sits to him. He's like, and how much did you get from Dominion lawsuit? It's a lot of money. You're gonna sue her for all that money. And that tells you who their master is. Right? Speaker 0: Oh, I think we do. Speaker 1: These people are satanic. Right? That you you've you can't beat me in the arena of truth and facts. So what do you do next? Well, I'm gonna punish you. I'm gonna destroy your livelihood. You're gonna have nothing to your name. And that's why I say this this case matters so much more to me, because we can't have this sort of behavior coming from people that are governing us. Right? That say, even if you find the truth, even if I am a pervert, even if I got away with sleeping with my student, even though his parents try to take him away, there's nothing you can do about it, and I'm gonna impoverish you for even telling people. Like, that's what this lawsuit is. I'm gonna impoverish you for telling the truth, and they're happy. You gotta see they're like he's, like, giddy discussing it, and then he turns into camera, Jake Tapper, and goes, Fox News did this, and how much money did you get? Like, it's it's totally bizarre. I'm like, that's your master, and you're gonna come up against you're gonna come up against a hard rock here because I don't care about money. If if I hope the story of Candace Owens over the last two years will have come to understand that money is not my master. Speaker 0: I I think that's very obvious to everyone. Interesting, though, since I know everybody you're talking about, is you're the happiest person by far. And I don't mean to be, like, fake pious or whatever. Like, the good guys win in the end, but it is true that you you can tell who's who's speaking truth by who is common and happy. It is true. Yeah. Lying makes you afraid, brittle, angry. It does. I've lied before. It makes me afraid, brittle, and angry. And the more you tell the truth, the calmer you are. Right. I I just think that's real. And, anyway, I don't think in the end you win siding with the state against the truth teller. Speaker 1: No. And I that's why I asked that question. Like, Tom, I know you've watched every minute of this series. You know that they are surrounded by these people. You know about the children victims that have been silenced. Is it really worth it? Speaker 0: You said that to him? Speaker 1: Yeah. Like, on my podcast. I just said I had to openly as we went through this Manichae affair and this woman ending up dead because they fought to, like, get this pedophile and creature in Amian released. I just asked him, like, is it really worth it? Like, because for me, you couldn't I couldn't look at a case that involved the abuse of children or a network of people who are involved with the abuse children, who have admitted to abusing children, who are defending people who have admitted to abusing children, and put my head on the pillow at night. And that's what matters most. In everything that I do, I have to be able to put my head on a pillow at night and say, I feel like I've done, I I did what I thought was the right thing to do, and it was a good thing to do. Yes. And most people are not guided by that. They're guided by this master of money. Right? And they're willing to do these sorts of things to look the other way because you're gonna cash a check. Like, you and Libby are gonna cash a check, and, like, that's gonna be good. Do you want that to be your legacy? I I ask him that genuinely. Like, I hope that we do get to court, and I get to ask him that face to face. Maybe he's deposing me, and I get to ask him, is the money worth it? I I just wanna know. I need to know that because I could never when it comes to children. I will breathe fire on Tom Claire before I would sign up to knowingly aid people who have harmed children. Speaker 0: Having said in a long deposition with Tom Claire, I can tell you the game is to make you mad. And that's very easy with me because I'm a hothead. Probably won't work with you. You seem to have way more emotional control than I do. But I I do think just wanna I don't wanna be mean, but I just wanna say when people have in mind when Shakespeare wrote about lawyers, and I'm like, oh, that's a little harsh. Kill all the lawyers. What are you doing? He he had Tom Clare in mind. Mhmm. He really is a discredit to the profession. I can I can say that? Speaker 1: Or credit the profession. Or credit. Speaker 0: If I was a legit I mean, the godfathers of my children are lawyers, you know, and really good my college roommates, really good guys, great guys, men of integrity, true integrity with wives who respect them, kids who love them, and just good men. But if I was a lawyer, if I was one of them, and Tom Claire is stalking the earth, I'd be like, man, we gotta disbar that guy because he discredits the entire profession. Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, it it's very interesting. I I I don't know what is guiding him at this point, but it is Speaker 0: I think we know. Speaker 1: Definitively not goodness. Right? Speaker 0: It's definitely not. Speaker 1: Does he think he can when I know he doesn't, because like I said, I got advice from their law firm not to pursue a defamation claim. So you're in this, what, to help bolster their idea to the world that they haven't done anything when you know when you know that they're lying, when you know that your client is lying and you so represent them. I again, I don't know how people put their head on the pillow at night. And what's interesting about me, and he'll just come up against a rock, is I have nothing to hide. Right? If I had anything to hide, you guys would have found out last year. Right? That where I went through and physic like, felt like a an X-ray from the press, as they tried to destroy everything that I had, everything that I held dear. I mean, it was nonstop. I mean, banned from Australia demanding that my speaking events get canceled because I'm an anti Semite, you know, fired in front of the world. I mean, last year was really one for the books, and anything that they could find on me, they wrote articles about, and they smeared me, and they libeled me, and the idea was to kill me. It was like, you know, lay it dead. This girl should no longer have a career. And I survived it. And I survived it because I had the one thing that they couldn't quite kill, which is truth on my side. I told the truth. Okay? So at the end of the day, it takes so much more energy and persistence to lie. You have to lie repeatedly. You have to keep telling the person That's Speaker 0: true. Speaker 1: That the shadows on the wall are real. Like, you know? And we tell the truth. We only have to say it once. And Speaker 0: And it hangs in the air, and it resonates, and people can feel that it's real. Speaker 1: Mhmm. And so they were unsuccessful in trying to destroy me, to try to destroy everything I've ever worked for in my entire life with smears and libels and lies. And so what what's left? What is he gonna say to me? Can't like, what are you saying to me during a deposition? Yeah. I think that's a man, and I think that everyone around them is way too close to pedophilia. And I think, Tom Claire, that you should be ashamed of yourself and any person that would ever launch a defense knowing that children were hurt in the process, I think. You know, you you better hope karma's not real. Speaker 0: Have you ever talked to McCrone? Texted he texts people, I happen to know. Speaker 1: Wish you would text me. I'd love to speak to him. I I view him as a victim, by the way. Okay? You are a a child, and your drama teacher, whatever, is is macking on you, and you're 14 years old. I I don't know what Macron has lived through, but when you get into his backstory, it's very weird as well. It's a very weird backstory. A lot of holes in the backstory. And he is, to me, like a Zelensky. He's totally powerless. There's somebody in the shadows telling him what to do. One of the more fun things learning about McCrone is the press sold him as this, like, savant. You know? Like, he's just, oh, he's so brilliant, and ahead of his time. He's needed to sell this, like, creepy relationship. You know? The 14 year old's ahead of his time. And He was a man of fortune. 60 year old. I don't know what we're doing. Right? That's weird. But what was really funny was that he then starts to work for Rothschilds Bank. And before he went to Rothschilds Bank, he went to this school. I don't know how to give you, like, a tit for tat with America. Let's just call it, like, he kind of pursued his masters. And nobody knew how he got into the school. He actually didn't get into the school twice. And then he gets into the school, and they take this test, and he is he graduates I mean, he passes with flying colors at the top of the class, and the class revolted because they all knew he was dumb. And they knew that there was a fix in for Macron, and so they just canceled test scores that year. So the first time in the school's history because the kids were suddenly going, there's no way this person got this grade. Same thing happens when he goes to Rothschild Bank. They said, and this is again according to a Wall Street Journal book, I only use mainstream sources, that everyone who worked with him said he was an absolute idiot. They had no idea why he was at this bank except for the fact that David Rothschild's hand was on him. Like, they basically, like, he was allowed to be in these rooms. He didn't even know what EBITDA stood for, but he worked for Rothschild Bank. And they said that it was just very clear that the hand of Rothschild was on him, and so they would all just remark to themselves, like, how are we working with this guy who's an absolute idiot? So even the idea of Macron being this, like, sophisticated, brilliant banker who was ahead of his time is just not real. If the mainstream media sources are to be believed again, this was a book that was done by the Wall Street Journal, and they sourced people that worked with him and said that he was an absolute idiot, which mirrored exactly what the people who went to school with him said when they had to cancel test wars because of his fake spouse. Speaker 0: What's the relationship between McCrone and and Justin Trudeau? I They they just remind me of each other. They seem like they're from the same factory line assembly, you know, we're looking at foreign Speaker 1: is very clearly a homosexual. I think that's very obvious. People have come out and talked about sleeping with him, and he's never sued them for anything. Very Speaker 0: weird. Really? Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. Right when he got when he became president, there was a and I'm I'm blanking on his name. He came out and spoke and said, there's this guy is you know, watch out for Macron. He's got some issues. Like, they you know, he said that he was a part of a sex party with him. Macron never disputed it. And since he likes to sue for defamation, that would have been a pretty good one to go after if a guy is saying he slept with you and that you that you have mental issues, like, that he's, like, almost like a masochist in in many ways. But the entire if you just kind of look at the world right now, a lot of theater boys are getting power. You know? Zelensky was an actor and a performer, and he actually played the role of being the president and then actually became the president. Macron, he was a theater boy. Okay? And now all of a sudden, he's, like, playing the part of the president of France. I don't take any of these people seriously. Like, this is you are As people. This is your next act. Yeah. You are told to pretend that you're the president of France, and somebody behind you is telling you what to do. And we can definitely as Americans, I think we can all agree whether you're left or right, that that is a circumstance after having Biden in office because we know, irrespective of whether you loved him or hated him, that he was not cognitively there Right. And yet the government still ran, and that should terrify you. Who was in control Speaker 0: Well, exactly. Speaker 1: While he was on a steep cognitive decline. It's the same for, I think, the entire Western world, that these people are not in real in real control, and that there's they're just made to kind of delude the public into believing that, like, yeah, this is a republic and a democracy, and you have a say and, look, you elected this person, but somebody else is obviously pulling the strings. Speaker 0: That's a fascinating observation that has never occurred to me that the theater kids have taken, like, literally. Literal theater kids. That's just Speaker 1: Here's your next role. You're gonna be present. Speaker 0: Speaking of theater, I I just hesitate even to ask this, but since because I I mean, it just opens up all this stuff I don't wanna deal with. But you just interviewed Nick Fuentes or or had a conversation with him. What did you think of that? What do you think of him? Speaker 1: I mean, I can tell you my experience is was entirely fraudulent with him. I I never interview people as a gotcha interview. It's always just that he he was making the rounds. He's been around for a while, and kind of his story when I learned it, because he was banned from everywhere, so I didn't actually know what the backstory was with Nick Fuentes. But then I learned it when he was loud back on X, and Jeremy Boring, who was then the CEO of Daily Wire, did this X Live with him. And Speaker 0: Jeremy Boring did an did an event with Nick Fuentes? Speaker 1: Honestly, it was weird. Everything was weird about what happened, but it happened. And Nick told his story, and I was listening in and said essentially that he was canceled because he started asking questions about Israel. He was 18 years old, and he alleged that it was, you know, very much the fault of the Daily Wire or whatever he said. And I found it very interesting. And I was like, oh, I actually didn't know if this was the backswag. Maybe this really is a person who had just ahead of everybody else was questioning Israel and had, like, a bad hand given to him. So I had him on the show, welcomed him into my home, and he was very nice. We told him we're gonna cut, you know, a controversial trailer. We're gonna show you, like, these clips of you talking trash about me, and you can talk about whatever you want for as long as you want. Ask any questions you wanna ask. It went great. He left. He said, thanks. We can now be friends. And I am not kidding. We published this eleven days later, and he it was I don't even know how to he just starts screaming, calling me an effing b I t c h who set him up. We didn't edit a single thing. Those eleven days, like, two weeks before we even published the interview, we told him if there's anything that he wanted us to insert. Like, nobody does that if you go on the show. Yes. And I don't know what I genuinely don't know what triggered him other than me at the very end asking him about, like or talking to him about family. And it was it was just the rage that was coming out of him was just weird. And I don't know why he did that. I don't know why he did a one eighty. He had access to me. You could have said anything after. You even if he had said in good faith, I thought I sounded a little weird here. Could you cut it out? We probably would have cut it out because I just don't want people to ever not have a good experience Speaker 0: coming on Speaker 1: show. You what I'm saying? Speaker 0: You want people well, this I'll speak for myself. When I invite someone on, especially just to hear their views, I want them to be able to express what they actually think. Speaker 1: Right. Exactly. Speaker 0: And you decide what you think, and you decide how to express it. I mean, that's like a basic human. Right? Kind of. And so I'm not here to trip you up into saying something you don't mean. I wanna hear what you do mean. Speaker 1: Yeah. Exactly. And and he told the story. He did all of that. And apparently then and I I don't know if it was driven by insecurity. He didn't know how his followers would take the interview, but he just did a complete one eighty, lied to his audience, pretended that he was surprised he was behind a paywall. We spoke about him and how we were going to release it. He said, great. Mean, it's a totally total one eighty flip. So I can now say that I didn't listen to other people say that Nick was a bad person. I didn't care about what happened when he was 18, 19, 20, 20 I sat across from a person, had a conversation with him. He behaved one way in person and then put on a show for the Internet. So I actually can say my experience with Nick Fuentes is that he's a terrible person and a terrible human being because why would you do that? There's no reason to do that. Speaker 0: I agree. Speaker 1: You could have come back onto the show. You you could have had beginning of us discussing various topics. I think in many ways, whatever happened to him was when he was 18 may have stunted his growth, meaning that he now is responding to the Internet, which is filled with people that don't even use their real names. Right? So so really, truly, what the irony of it all is you could just be like the IDF soldiers just pretending to be his supporters, just getting him to say whatever you want because he's gonna do whatever you say, but it was strange. It was totally strange. It made no sense. Speaker 0: I just he have a family or a normal life? Speaker 1: I asked him about that. He said, yeah. He comes from a two parent household. That's what he told me. Speaker 0: No. Does he have his own family? Does he Speaker 1: No. No. He's not married. And and I just offered to him. I was like, yeah. No. I think these are things that you learn when you're married, and he just was vicious about it. And, you know Speaker 0: About about Speaker 1: don't tell me what to do or whatever it was, and it was very performative. Like, I said the exact same thing to Andrew Tate months earlier. I had him, and I said, you should get married. Here's why. And, of course, Andrew Tate did not react like that. He told me what his hangups were about marriage. It was just a part of two people communicating on a show. But for whatever reason, like, it was he saw this as, like, an attack even though Speaker 0: Interesting. Speaker 1: Yeah. It was weird. It was totally weird. Speaker 0: Tender spot. Well okay. Has it occurred to you that and I just wanna say I haven't watched a lot of Nick Fuentes in my life at all. But what I've seen, the guy's very talented, Like, just as a as a well, let me just say this. As someone who's talked to cameras his whole life, it is very hard to sit and just, like, riff for 20 And I just I think it's an amazing skill, and he has that skill. But I also have noticed that his targets are all people who are sincere, non crazy, non hateful opponents of neocon politics. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: So you have to kind of wonder about that. So Nick Fuentes is like, oh, I don't like the neocons, but then his targets are J. D. Vance, Joe Kent. He like tried to he got involved in Joe Kent's campaign with super oh, yes. You, me, and it's like, what is that? Speaker 1: Dave Smith. Speaker 0: Dave Smith. Speaker 1: Asked him about that because I that's a question that I had. So I did the right thing by asking him to his face. What's up with this? Like, why do you attack Dave Smith? You say that, like, your biggest critique is that America's being controlled by Israel, then you have Dave Smith who has been such a sound voice. And by the way, opposite experience with Dave Smith. I have my podcast. He's a fantastic human being. I judge Speaker 0: is one of the nicest people Speaker 1: ever. Human. Yes. And so I judge people according to my experiences with them, and so Nick is being judged according to my experience with him. And Speaker 0: like, what is this? Speaker 1: I don't get Where does the funding Speaker 0: come from? I had I probably shouldn't even say this, but I had the only reason I know who he is is because someone sent me a video a few years ago of him attacking me, and I was like, so I'm looking at this. And I'm like, well, first of all, this kid's really talented, like legit. And I can assess that just having done the job for so long. So I was like, wow. Lots of talent, native talent. And he's attacking my dad as a CIA. His dad's in the CIA or whatever. And I'm like, well, that's no. Untrue. Then my father dies, and I learn, actually, yeah, know, was involved in that world. I was completely shocked by it. So no one has to believe me, but that's just a fact. Right. This was in March. And I'm like, well, why would how the hell would this child from Chicago and my dad was 84 when he passed. Like, how who's this guy know my dad is? And, like, he's in an intelligence how would he know that? Speaker 1: I didn't So that was his critique of you because I didn't see it? Speaker 0: Yeah. He's like Someone just sent me this video and it was like, you can't believe anything Carlson says because his father was in the CIA and he's Absolutely. CIA working on behalf of the CIA. Well, I mean, I think it's pretty obvious and I'm pretty I mean, I actually feel emotional in my anger towards CIA, and I think of that that comes out on the air quite regularly. Right. And so the idea that I'm working for the CIA is like deranged. Speaker 1: Well, if it helps, he said I was I'm funded by Russia. Now since the interview, he then did a thing and said, I was funded by Russia. Would be a Speaker 0: lot more likely to take Russian money than I would be to work for the CIA because probably you would never take Russian money, and you're not Russian. But I but, mean, really hate the CIA. And mean, would I mean, that's, like, very offensive to me. So why would you Speaker 1: It's like personal for you. Speaker 0: Well, a little bit. Yeah. And, anyway, like, who is this kid exactly? Speaker 1: Mhmm. Speaker 0: And maybe it's just an accident that the guy goes after, exclusively goes after, people who are in the same roughly the same. And then he gets up there, he's like, you know, making Holocaust jokes, and it's like, is it possible that this is like David Duke? David Duke every time I had a new show, David Duke would endorse my show. I don't know Dave. Who the hell is David Duke? Well, David Duke is obviously part of a campaign to discredit people on the right. Obviously. Speaker 1: And Speaker 0: I think it's very obvious that Nick Fuentes is exactly the same. Doesn't mean everything he says is false. It's it doesn't mean he's not talented. He's enormously talented. Doesn't mean he's a bad person. I'm not attacking him personally, but he is clearly part of a campaign to discredit noncrazy right voices. You know That's obvious to me. I've been around a long time. I know when I see it. Speaker 1: Yeah. And I will say I I don't understand it. We were very kind to him. Like, I truly like, we almost said, like, we felt maybe he was a bit lonely. We shouldn't buy him back for dinner. You I mean, that's how good of an experience I had. I that and Clearly, it's a one eighty. So it's either a, it's being driven from, like, a little boy insecurity, and he just was so worried that he, like, just went on the attack because he doesn't know how to have normal relations after being banned everywhere. Speaker 0: Well, I think there's the kind Speaker 1: could be one element. Speaker 0: The angry gay kid thing going on. Speaker 1: Yeah. Or it's the what you're saying where he does this, he's lying to everybody and pretending that things are one way when it's not. I can say he's Speaker 0: Joe Kent who I mean, Joe Kent worked for as a CI contractor, paramilitary contractor. He's he's in the US military for years fighting our neocon wars. His wife was killed in Syria in one of those wars. Joe Ken is the single most sincere critic, and I would say the one with the most credibility in The United States to say this foreign policy is bad. It killed my wife. I was a part of it. Joe Ken is actually someone the CIA doesn't like at all because he understands how it operates. And for Nick Fuentes, who's like some child from Chicago who I mean, to go after him specifically, one congressional seat in Washington state. Speaker 1: It was random. Speaker 0: It's not random, though. It's the opposite of random. Joe Kent was number one on the list of people they wanted to knock off, people who believe in our neocon foreign policy. They wanted Joe Kent out because he could stand up and say, I actually know. I've got the receipts. My wife was killed in Syria. You had to take that guy out. And Nick Fuentes, this child, this weird little gay kid in his basement in Chicago, is participating in a super PAC to bump off Joe Kent? Like, I've been around this my whole life. What super PAC is. It's just an organized effort. Yeah. And he also did the thing that David Duke always did, including to me, which is being like, oh, yeah. It's my friend. And everyone's like, oh, Tucker Carlson's been endorsed by David Duke. I've been making, like, the anti racist argument my whole life. Right. Like, I'm not for David Duke. Do I think David Duke is right when he's against affirmative action? You bet I do, but I'm not for David Dukes. But David Duke would try to discredit people by hugging them. Mhmm. And that's exactly what Fontes did. He goes out there and meet all these people, and she'll, hi. I'm Nick Fontes. Can I get my picture with you? That's a campaign to destroy credible voices on the right, and Fuentes is part of it. And I know I'm gonna I'm inviting endless trouble by saying this because, you know, this is a kid with a lot of spare time, but it's just a fact, and I've seen it a lot. Yep. And I and I you can believe me or not, but I know what I'm talking Speaker 1: about. I I can confirm he's dishonest. I mean, there's no so it's like you use that as your like, I I could not determine what his moeys were. I I said, you know what? I don't have time for this. I gave you a fair chance, gave you a fair shake, and you are a fundamentally dishonest human being. You know? There was no there was no reason to do it. If he had not done that show and screened and yelled, his followers would have been like, that was an interesting conversation between two people who agreed some, disagreed some, and, like, that was it. It was interesting that he got there. He doesn't want to be and I can tell you that he doesn't want to be anywhere but where he is. He doesn't wanna have normal relations, and it did it did sort of feel, and I said that to him, that he's, like, responding to orders somewhere because why are you attacking me? Why why why are you attacking Dave Smith? What is the issue with Dave Smith? He couldn't answer the question. Speaker 0: Exactly. Speaker 1: He couldn't answer the question. He was just like, well Speaker 0: The fakest thing I've ever seen. Speaker 1: And he's I'm like, why do you hate Dave Smith over Joe Rogan? And it's like, well, Dave Smith is this kind of a Jew. I'm like, okay, I don't either you really are this immature and you haven't gotten further in your ideas, or you're just attacking people and making people think that these attacks are legitimate when they're really not, and we were so kind to him that I was just like, okay. Speaker 0: He's attacking Dave Smith because Dave Smith is effective and credible. Speaker 1: He's very effective. Speaker 0: Because he's smart, he's a decent person. There's no hate on Dave Smith. Mhmm. And you would smell it if there was and there isn't. And he he has credibility and he has knowledge, and he's a marvelous debater and once again a really good person, so you have to take out Dave Smith. You have to take out Joe Kent. Those are the good people. You have to take out J. D. Vance. He was against J. D. Vance. So if you're against, like, more pointless wars on behalf of foreign powers, like, you're probably not gonna be attacking J. D. Vance. And Vance was exactly the person he was attacking. So this And the sad thing is, and I know that no one who watches him will believe him because they're desperate, because they are the victims of a system that hates him. It's young white men who've been totally cut out of our economy, attacked mercilessly, given narcotics just go die. I mean, they really are the victims, and they're desperate, and no one speaks for them. So they go to Fuentes because he's like incredibly articulate, and they think he's our leader. But in one of the saddest ironies of all, like, he's acting against your interests actually. It's ugh. Yeah. It's really dark. Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't believe he says I don't I no longer think that he believes what he says, and I can say that, like, even the whole, yeah, I just say I'm a racist. I know he in part, he says stuff to be entertaining, and that's fine. There's an element of it that is meant to be entertaining. But you got on a pod a flight to come down onto a podcast with a black woman. Like, I don't think you're racist. I don't believe your ideas that women It's like, know, women need to shut up. It's like, okay. Why are you on my podcast? Why are you saying that you want people to have you on their podcasts? So there's just the there's a gap between what he says and how he acts. And for me, that's just worthy of dismissing, full stop. You know? Be authentic. I don't care who you are. Like, I kind of like Taylor Lorenz because I know that she actually believes what she says. You get what I'm saying? Like, at least she's authentic. And I'm like, she's been wearing a mask for five years. Okay? It is real to her. COVID is real to her. This is not a performance. She is not this is not CNN. It's not Jake Tapper. I and I respect it. I told my parents, like, I kind of like her. It's weird because I know she's authentic, and we would just genuinely never agree. We would always be at odds, but we would recognize that you truly believe this and you are still double masked in 02/2025. Speaker 0: I'm so with you. Speaker 1: Yeah. I like her because it's it's real, and that's all it takes for me to like someone. I have to know that you believe what you're saying, and I'm I'm I'm good with Taylor Lorenz. Speaker 0: Oh, that's so perfect. That is such a great I ran into her in some foreign country. I was giving a speech somewhere in a foreign country. I think it was in The Middle East. But, anyway, she comes up to me at the speech, and she's wearing a mask. I have no idea who this person is. But I look at her eyes, and they're kinda going in different directions. They're, like, super intense. She goes, hi. It's Taylor. I don't know her. I've never met her. And I was like, oh, Taylor Wrens? And she's like, yeah. So my only takeaway was the intensity is real. Speaker 1: Yeah. It's real. So it's like, how can you not like her? The people that I can't stand are people who get up there, like the Jake Tapper's the world. You get up there and they say something they don't believe. It's not how they live. It's not what their true positions are. Speaker 0: Right. Speaker 1: They say it for a check. Taylor Luren's, this is not a it's not a check for her. K? I'm like, that stops at wearing she's four she's been wearing a mask for five years. She hasn't seen her face in five years. Okay? This is real for Taylor Luren's, and I therefore like her. That's how my brain works. I just I I am here for Taylor Luren's. Speaker 0: I think that's I think it's a great way to judge people. Just be authentic. I do. Yeah. I do. I think telling the truth, even if you're wrong Yeah. Doing your best really, really matters. So how do you so you mentioned before that last year was a was just a tsunami of attacks on you, not simply on your views and their accuracy, which I think is you know, it's legitimate to critique anything any of us say on the basis of whether or not it's true, but on your character. Speaker 1: Mhmm. Speaker 0: And they were very intense. They attacked your family. I won't go more I won't go deeper than that, but you know what I'm talking about. I mean, they really went after you, your opponents. How did that affect you? Speaker 1: It was one of the strangest things where it's it strengthened us in a way. I think you have to get real up close to the devil, but, you know, just really see it in its its action, in its form, and then you just go, okay. Like, we're we're doing this, and we have there's there's no thinking because you're just fighting. And then I think about last year, it was just we were constantly fighting and very focused in those fights. And Speaker 0: Not with each other. Speaker 1: No. Me and my husband were just like, we've truly I mean, not to say we've never been more united, we've always been united, but we are are the way what we went through last year, it was just we can make it through anything. You know? Speaker 0: How do you keep it? Speaker 1: He was so calm, and I do think I attribute that to his faith. I attribute that. Do you know my husband is a spiritual leader first and foremost, and I think if he had shown even a fraction of uncertainty, I probably would have come apart. Do know what I I do. But he was just a he just it was amazing. I don't I don't know how he does it. I've reflected to him because obviously we've survived it. We came back bigger and stronger, and I just look back and I go, were you, like, dying on the inside? Were you, like, going into the closet and crying, you know, behind my bag? Because I I don't know how George did it. I really don't know how he did it. But he was just laser focused. Nothing was a drama or a saga. It's like, Australia's banned us, and he's just like, okay, here's the first person on the phone, the lawyer, we're gonna go, and we are right now in the Supreme Court in Australia right now. It the case is called Candace Owens versus the Commonwealth of Australia No. Among other and versus France versus Australia. He's like, here's what we're gonna do. And so it was one of those things where when you go through those sorts of attacks, it either breaks you or it strengthens you, and it strengthened us. And I didn't think that we needed to be strengthened. And so now, I'm so grateful for last year because there was this divine clarity that came into our lives. Who are who are our real friends? Right? Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: Who are our real friends? And these other people, how could we have ever thought that they were our friends? Like, even waiting to see who's gonna speak out and say that this is wrong? Like, the number one litmus test is, let's not forget, before we even get down to the books that I've read and what I think now, all I said was Christ is king. Okay? This was like, it's antisemitic. It's layered. It's this. It's that. And there were people who I would have been like, I've always been friendly with, who are making videos legit legitimatizing that. Like, she didn't say it directly to anybody, but it could have been kind of implied, and this is why you shouldn't say Christ is king. And we're looking around going, what is going on right now? What is happening? And I think at that moment Speaker 0: craziest controversies I've ever seen. Speaker 1: Controversy. Speaker 0: So there were people on the so called right who attacked you for saying Christ is king? Speaker 1: Of course there were. And it one of those people was and I've been very vocal about it because he's such a bad person, Seth Dillon. And what makes him such a bad person is I really stood up for Seth Dillon that mattered. Speaker 0: I did too. Speaker 1: When it really mattered, and, like, the like, he thought he was gonna lose everything. Yep. And I did it privately, you know, no fanfare, just because I I wanted the right thing to be done to him. And at a moment, we're all actually, if he had just given me silence, that would have been friendship in that moment. Like, the whole world was coming after me. I just lost my job. I'm trending, you know, from here to Timbuktu. If you had just been quiet and said nothing about Crisis King, it would have been like, that was nice. Thank you for not adding to the chorus. No. No. No. He added to the chorus, you know, and then would, like, privately try to message me to be like, well, and this was their whole big idea. They were attributing it to Nick Fuentes. And I had no idea that Nick Fuentes chanted Christ is king. And by the way, if he does chant Christ is king, good. That's a good thing. Like, I want everyone to be chanting Christ is king. But basically Speaker 0: It's like fundamental, like, Christianity. Speaker 1: Yeah. Exactly. It doesn't matter if if Nick Fuentes is saying Jesus is king. He is. And so he was sort of saying to me that I would have to make a layered statement about Christ as king. And Speaker 0: He said that to you? Speaker 1: Very much came came across. I said to him, I'll publish, because when he denied it publicly, said, let me publish the text messages. And he went radio silent, because I don't lie. Okay? I don't lie. And he wanted me to make a statement against Grapers. So my whole world is coming down, and Seth Dillon's like, here's what you can do for me if you'd like a life raft. You know what mean? Yeah. It's just tweet against the gripers. And I was just like, seriously, Seth? F you. You know, when your family had something that you were and I stood up for you, and I had there was nothing for me to gain, everything for me to lose, and you're you're upset about random frog accounts on the Internet, and you're adding to this chorus of things that are being said against me. And it's amazing what Speaker 0: a betrayer. Speaker 1: He he is. He's deceitful. You know? He is the Judas at your table. You know? He'll break bread with you, come to your house, and feel nothing when he stabs you in the back. Speaker 0: Yes. Speaker 1: And so with but I which is early. Now everyone sees it because now that we're him and Joel Barry have been so deranged in their pro Israel commentary, like, literally, like, applaud when I I I generally think that these people smile when Palestinian children die, but I saw it early, his character. I saw his character early when all that was required for him to be a friend was to just be quiet. He couldn't do it. You know? He added Speaker 0: to it. I had exactly the same experience. Exactly the same experience with him. I put him on twice at the request of other people. I took him out to dinner, my house. And I did think it's kinda weird, and I totally supported the Babylon Bee. I love the idea of it. Don't read it, but I I want something like that, and I think there are probably really nice people who work there, I assume. No. But I remember thinking and even saying to one of my producers, boy, for a guy who runs a comedy set, he's not funny at all. And he seems to have no interest in comedy at all. Not that I'm a comedian, but I I like funny things. You know? I'm a shallow guy. And I did think that was weird. And then and I didn't lie. I didn't like his vibe. However, I did it twice. And then I had Daryl Cooper on the August. I did not think it was controversial at all. Speaker 1: It wasn't. Speaker 0: No. And Daryl Cooper's, like, not even right wing. I mean, Darrell Cooper's just like a really nice guy. And it was you know, he's a Holocaust snare, which he is not. That's a lie. Or at least he didn't do it on my show. He's never done it in one conversation with me. Whatever. It became this manufactured controversy. And one of my producers was like, Seth Dillon is attacking you. I was like, I don't think so. I mean, I really helped that guy twice. And because he was you know, his site was being banned or whatever. So I text Seth Dillon, I'm like, is this are you really attacking me? And he starts, like, lecturing me in a very high handed way. And I, of course, took the bait, and then he published some of the texts. Speaker 1: Oh, so he does okay. That's good to know. He published his private I Speaker 0: may be misremembering this, but he came up to me at an event in I was doing a I was campaigning for Donald Trump, and he was there. He was very excited to be there. And he comes up to me. I was standing with a bunch of people, including Marjorie Taylor Greene, and he comes up and he's like, well, I think you should forgive me. You're a Christian. You say you're a Christian. You should forgive me. And I should forgive him because I am a Christian, and that's like a requirement of our religion, but I just couldn't because of all the people I've dealt with. I met Kim Jong un once, not quite as mad at him as I am at Seth Dillon because I just the betrayal, the superciliousness, the stupidity, and the cruelty of it, I just couldn't Speaker 1: Okay. He's he's gone mask down. I mean, he accidentally sent a screenshot that they didn't realize. Like, James Lindsay he sends screenshots to James Lindsay. And then James Lindsay? I don't I don't know who he is, I know, but he's always on Twitter in in the same puddle of people who are constantly just, like, I don't know, like, applauding Palestinian death. And he asked James Lindsay, didn't realize that it showed that it was from Seth Dillon's account. So clearly, Seth Dillon had texted it to him, and then James Lindsay then, like, said something about what it was. And it was amazing. It was a mascot moment where it's like, yeah, you're all on a group chat and you're sharing information of people who do attack, and you presented yourself as like the funny nice guy, and you're anything but, like, know, you're sinister. And is we all kind of fell for it for a little bit because I'm just the guy who does satire. No. You are like a totally deranged angry individual who would literally break bread with anyone and then stab them in the back. And so for me, like I said, I fear nothing. I was like, release messages. Daylight? I I will survive daylight. I have always treated people with kindness, and I have always worked very hard. I tell the truth. There's So nothing that Seth Dillon can expose about me that's gonna hurt my feelings, you know, or or or make me look like I'm a bad person. He's genuinely a bad person. So these were the sorts of individuals, like, last year when we were going through it where I was like, am I did I misremember us being like, I mean, like, putting everything on the line to help him? And could he just give us silence for a couple weeks? Like, just not just not just don't add in to the chorus. I'm not asking you to defend me. I'm asking you to not join in the chorus of people Speaker 0: that coming after world when you wake up and realize, like, Taylor Lorenz is obviously kind of deranged. Reviews are, like, repugnant to me. I've made fun of Taylor Lorenz, like, for a living. I've literally been paid in front of Taylor Lorenz. I'll admit it. But when you realize that she is actually a much more sincere and decent person than the guy who runs the Babylon Bee, then you realize, wow. Speaker 1: What's going on? Speaker 0: What yeah. What's going Speaker 1: sincere. I disagree with her on everything, but she's more sincere. Like, I don't think she's privately, like, being like, I'm not scared of COVID. She's scared of COVID. You know what I mean? So she's at least sinister. She's wrong, but she's sincere. And, yeah, that's that but I think that's what last year really was is there there was this moment where it needed to happen. There was this organic shedding where we got to see people for who they actually were, and a lot of people didn't survive last year. They're not the same. You know, it's not these people that were really big who spent all the time attacking. Now that we're looking at them going, what was that? Because you can't attack yourself into success. Right? You can't step on somebody's head when they're drowning and think that people are not gonna realize Yes. What you did because, like we said earlier, the end of the day, you're not in a battle with Kanazonians. You're in a battle with truth. And I wouldn't wanna be on the side of lies when you're when you're in a battle against truth. Okay? I told the truth. I said Christ is king. Whether I you know, when I talked even about Brigitte, whatever it is, whatever you're attacking me for, eventually, the truth is going to win, and you guys keep banking on the lies. And so I I'm happy. I'm very happy last year happened. I was very happy to delete a lot of these people from from my contacts, and it was a clarifying year that I can only look back on and thank God. You gotta thank God for moments of clarity. Speaker 0: So maybe the interview I expected least was most surprised by, but kinda weirdly delighted by, was Harvey Weinstein. What how did that happen? What was the thinking? Speaker 1: You know, the backstory of that actually is somebody in Harvey's orbit reached out to me while I was at the Daily Wire and said, I'd really like you to on the phone with Harvey. I'd love for you to, like, think about sitting down and interviewing him and doing all this stuff. And, you know, at that time, I thought he was guilty of sin like everybody else did because there were just so many women And was thinking, wow. He must be pretty desperate to wanna, like, reach out to me. I know he's left leaning. Like, I'll do it. Sure. Fine. And I got on the phone with him in prison and was very surprised that he clearly, this friend was kind of lying, and he Oprah was being floated to do the interview, and he's like, why on earth do I give you this interview? He was very, very powerful. And he'd I always describe it as Harvey has, like, a growl about him. You could still very powerful. And he kind of lashed me and said, you know, I support the ADL and talked about Kanye and talked about my support for Trump. He was all over the place. Still still a leftist in his prison cell, and I was kind of amazed by this. Speaker 0: He lectured you about the ADL from prison? Speaker 1: From prison. It was incredible. My autobiography is gonna be amazing. If I ever sit down and write one, like, that's definitely a highlight. I'm like, I'm getting lectured by Harvey Weinstein. He's in prison. And then I was sort of like I realized at that point that I was trying out for, like, one of his movies in a way, and I had to kinda sell myself of, like, why I would I wanted to do the interview, and then I thought this was so strange. And then I hung up and I looked into the case because that person then sent me the stuff, and I was just shocked. I've and I've never seen a crazier conviction in my entire life. He literally got convicted because people were crying even in the face of overwhelming evidence. I mean, one case, his argument is I wasn't even there. I wasn't even there. It's not even it's not even like he's like, I know this woman. Like, I was not I don't even stay at that hotel, and I don't know this woman. And the judge would not allow him, talking about the corruption of courts, to subpoena herself from Rutgers to see if she was even there. It was the and that was the person that got him, whatever, fifteen years in LA who the the cases are incredible. You were raped by him over the course of ten years? Help me understand this. And none of these women are young, by the way, because then I'm like, maybe there was an argument they were 17, and he manipulated they were sorta these women were 30 years old. We know what this is. This is a sugar baby traditional relationship. This is how it's always been in Hollywood. Young girls want careers. They sleep with directors. They do that stuff consensually. And I think in the case of Harvey Weinstein, because he actually cared very deeply about his movies, they assumed he was gonna give them these roles, and he didn't. He was just sort of like, yeah, I'm Harvey Weinstein. These girls threw themselves at him thinking there was gonna be an exchange, and there just wasn't one. And then if you look back in your life and now you're 50 and you slept with Harvey Weinstein, like, not the hottest Brad Pitt looking person, You're like, what did I get for this? And you kind of then see this movement taking off, and it's me too, and suddenly, it's, you know, he had the power and yeah. So what? Sent him a couple of emails saying I love you after he raped me, which they did. Yeah. Because that's what Speaker 0: I Yeah. Speaker 1: No. Love you. Miss you. But constantly, the emails, when you read through them, because there's a trove of them, are always them trying to be like, hey. I hear there's an upcoming audition. I'd love to attend the audition, or I'm going to Cannes. Can you get me some tick I mean, it is what it is. This was your traditional oldest trait in the book is what I would say. You know, the oldest trait in the book. Speaker 0: So what I mean, okay. For a hardened anti Semite Nazi like you to all of a Speaker 1: at it. Speaker 0: You're defending the ADL defender, Harvey Weinstein. Like, what what I don't how did you why why? So a lot of people look at this and first of I just wanna say I support it, just that I'm joking, but I support it only because I think that justice matters. I know Harvey Weinstein, he's a pig. Speaker 1: Mhmm. Speaker 0: As you know. Oh, yeah. Doesn't mean he's a criminal. Right. And I just think it's important to convict people when they violate the law and not to convict them when Speaker 1: they don't. Right. Speaker 0: And truth is the most important thing. So I support it. But it is like of all the stories, like, drew you to that? Speaker 1: Well, because he was the beginning of the me too movement, and I've had a gripe from the me too movement from the day that it trended on Twitter. I mean, you can go back. I am left and right. People were scared to say anything about the me too movement when it first happened because it was about rape. And people are instantly uncomfortable, and left and right people were just sort of reticent to say, oh, but don't we need to have do like, due diligence here? And people were losing their jobs left and right on basis of an allegation because it was hashtag trending, hashtag me too. And right away, when it first started trending Speaker 0: It was mob justice. Speaker 1: Yep. I said something against it, and I almost got canceled. Like, I will never forget this. Charlie Kirk, we had to get together with the PR agents. I was at Turning Point. He had Turning Point girls that were quitting, crying, saying, I was how could she not support the Me Too movement? Like, I was sexually it was totally and and credit to Charlie Kirk, like, held down the line because, you know, like I said, if you stand on truth, eventually, people catch up and realize that something's really wrong with this movement. But Harvey was this case where I think the entire world agreed that he was must have been guilty of something. There were just so many women that were coming out saying that this took place. Speaker 0: And his personal style was so you know, he's like eating with his mouth open Right. Smoking in the elevator. I mean, I saw him do it. And so I think because he is just like this piggish, overbearing, crass guy Mhmm. Which is not a crime. Speaker 1: Yeah. You just wanna see him go down. Speaker 0: Well, then he must have done it. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: And, like, are you really gonna take the side of Harvey Weinstein? Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: He's today's villain. Speaker 1: And I thought I was just doing an interview where I was gonna, like, you know, push back, get to the truth. And when I looked at these cases, I was just shocked. You know, what 90 women who came out and said he did something, and it actually boiled down to three cases. And in the two New York ones that he got twenty six years for, I mean, just you read the emails. It's crazy. You you just cannot come out of reading the emails from Jessica Mann and Evgenia, I'm blanking on her last name, and just go, what happened here? Like, what do you mean you convicted him of rape? On the basis of these emails alone, why would you then like, has anybody ever, and Jessica Mann clearly is the first person ever who's done this, hit up their rapist after and been like, hey. With my mom in town, like, can we come by? You know, do wanna meet my mom? Because actually actually, that's one of the emails post rape. You know? It's hard for me to believe that that's rape. I don't believe in if lucky I wasn't sitting on that jury, and I think it does a tremendous disjustice to unjustice to two people. First, women, right, who are actually raped. Yeah. Of course. Because if we're now saying all of this is rape, and then people are just not gonna be inclined to believe women who are actually raped. They're gonna go, oh, another rape situation. Okay. So that's it. It's like you're you're softening what it means to be raped. But the second thing is I have three sons. This case mattered to me because my sons' lives are now threatened by this movement that said, hashtag believe women. Women lie. They lie a lot. Right? I mean and so why don't we do this crazy thing and just believe the facts and follow the facts of the case? And so I was very concerned when this movement just kind of got carried away. I even had to defend someone who I don't like, Matt Lauer. That was a crazy case. Yes. Very clearly had a consensual relationship all over New York with that intern. Yes. But she was raped the first time. And then, you know, all the other times, apparently, it wasn't rape, but it doesn't really matter because here's a check. Right? And And that's what happened. And to this day, he carries on being branded a a rapist. Like, people still say that about Matt Lauer because somebody made an allegation. And when you look at the facts, it's like, no. He was a scumbag. He was cheating on his wife. He was abusing his power certainly because the people the reason they probably wanted to sleep with him is because he was Matt Lauer of the the Today Show. But to call him a rapist, like, is that fair? Speaker 0: I agree. Speaker 1: Is that okay? Speaker 0: I Speaker 1: can we at least all say, I don't care whether you're left or right, but that's wrong? And that was the challenge of the Harvey Weinstein Speaker 0: I know a lot about that story just for well, because that's the world I lived in. I knew him, and I everything you said just said is true. Speaker 1: Of course. I I mean, I am a woman. I clearly know that women will flirt with guys to get what they want even if it's a drink at a bar. So you can only imagine Hollywood where you welcome that climate of exchange. Women who are just want to be the next Angelina Jolie. They all think they're gonna be the next Angelina Jolie. What they'd be willing to do for that part, And Harvey benefited from that. He was Harvey Weinstein. He's making the best movies ever made in Hollywood. And, you know, honestly, I'd argue that movies haven't been great since Harvey went in. Right? He his movies were like, I mean, every classic movie that you can think of, Harvey Weinstein, the Weinstein company produced. The Mirror what was it called? Mirror I can't think of the company's name. Miramax was his company, had produced. So it's a lot. It was a lot to unpack, and yet they still moved. You know, obviously, the appellate judge has said this case was completely ridiculous. It was rigged. Why'd you guys even allow these people into the courtroom just to convict his character and not based on the facts? And it got sent back down, but he just lost again on two of the cases. And so I just interviewed him, and that interview is is coming out today. Again, to ask him, okay. Here's a broader question, Harvey. Who hates you? Because this is so clearly somebody took you out, and that's how I look at the case now. Who were you involved with? Who did you piss off that wanted you to no longer be who you were in Hollywood? Because this is this is power. This is a structure. The judges are allowing this to take place for a reason, and his answers were quite interesting. You know? And I think Harvey Weinstein did upset a lot of powerful people, and he he was honest about that. Speaker 0: I I get it. I have no trouble believing that at all given his style, which is, like, totally overbearing and, like, awful. But throwing someone in prison for the rest of his life is, you know, it's too much. Speaker 1: He said Gloria Allred told him if she paid him, and I I view her as a gangster of sorts, everyone knows how she moves. When she's on a case, she doesn't lose, that if he had paid her, and I wanna say it was a million dollars, don't quote me, that it would go away. She could, like, go away. He didn't do it. Yeah. That's what he told me on record. So it's it's people are gonna hear it from his own mouth, but that tells me that we're looking at maybe something different in what was the Me Too movement. And I've spoken to other people that were victims of it, and they alleged to me that a lot of it has to do with publishing rights, that if they wanna take out a business, you can take out force a person to essentially have to sell their business and their assets if you can create a scandal. And I'm inclined to believe that after examining the Michael Jackson case, because he was in a war with Sony over publishing rights, and suddenly, he was being accused. And I didn't remember much about that case, but then when I went and I looked at it, it was a crazy story of, like, a kid who was drugged by his dad to say that he was raped by Michael Jackson. Literally, he was drugged by his father. And so you start to wonder if there's a lot of stuff that's happening in Hollywood that many people have tried to speak out about, and those people have either been deemed crazy, or in the case of Michael Jackson, he doesn't know he's into children, and we sort of pay attention to the media circus of everything without realizing that, like, there could be other stuff happening in Hollywood. Speaker 0: Do you think it's possible that Michael Jackson was not a Speaker 1: child molester? I am now convinced after looking at the case that he was not, and that he was at a war with Sony. And I did a whole episode on it. I was shocked because I grew up loving Michael Jackson, and then I was absolutely Of repulsed by Michael Jackson. Like, he meant so much in my childhood. And then I was repulsed by Michael Jackson, and then I decided to reexamine what happened, and I just I couldn't believe it. I mean, I I literally could not believe Like Harvey Weinstein. Winning. He was gonna win the Beatles catalog. It was his. He was fighting Sony and winning. And then just like that, scandal broke dead. Even the way he died is weird, you know, but, like, you know, it was it was a lot. When you go back and look at that case, you realize the media tells you so much, but they tell you absolutely nothing. Speaker 0: Michael Jackson was weird in the same way that Harvey Weinstein was obnoxious, in the same way that Richard Jewell seemed like a fake cop. The guy was blamed for the Atlanta Olympics bombing in '96 who didn't do it. They kind of fit your preconceptions of what a bad guy like that would be. Mhmm. You know, Michael Jackson living in Neverland, his weird kind of personal Disney with all these little kids. You're like, he's clearly a kid toucher. Speaker 1: Mhmm. Mhmm. And he definitely had issues because he felt that he had his childhood stolen from him, so he kinda made it his priority in this, I would say, very creepy way to constantly say, I'm gonna create this Neverland Ranch, and so kids are never gonna go through anything. But it's quite telling that he was so close above with anybody else with Macaulay Culkin. Right? Also, person who alleged that he was being raped by directors was that Corey I wanna say Corey maybe Feldman. Yeah. And he's he's been vocal about how he was abused. And both of those people said absolutely never, not once did Michael Jackson do anything to them. They stood up for him. And then when you get into the people that said that he did something and you figure out what their motives were, one's drugged, one was paid, it this the Michael Jackson story gets completely crazy. And so what you had was a man who was stunted in his growth because of his childhood, who wanted to make the the world a special magical place for people, and he became the, you know, the perfect I mean, he won his case, so we can say Michael Jackson was not guilty. Right? He actually won his case once the jury saw all the evidence. But, yeah, it's kind of scary to think that a media circus can be created about you, and people can believe things, just like we were saying with Matt Lauer Yes. Absent very little fact because the media just keeps saying it. And that gets into the importance of why I select and get you know, I'm like a dog with a bone on certain cases, the Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni case is another one. Again, Justin Baldoni's Jewish, obviously, so is Steve Sarowitz. I'm like the worst anti Semite ever. Here I am defending these people, but it's the same thing. She went to the press and tried to smear this man and ruin his existence by claiming, in so many words, that he had sexually harassed her, and she made him sound, with the help of the New York Times, like he was an absolute creep, a pervert, a sex addicted pervert. If you read that article, you took away that Justin Baldoni was a sex addicted pervert. Right? And poor Blake Lively had to survive doing a movie with him. If Brian Friedman had not done what he had done and published the entire he said he had nothing to hide, like, the every text message sent between Blake and Justin and Ryan Reynolds, the world would have believed what she and the New York Times had worked on. It was it's it's a shocking case. People are going, oh, it's just like celebrity drama. No. This isn't celebrity drama. This is so much deeper than that. Okay? We are talking about the corruption of the media who has the trust of the people. Like, you're an educated person. You read the New York Times. Right? The New York Times essentially assisted in a hit on a man. For what reason? What did Blake actually want from Justin Baldoni? Publishing rights. And we got to read her messages, and she wanted to be put on the film, and she wanted to be put as a producer, executive producer, or else. Right? You do this or else threatening, so I'm not gonna come back. Here are my demands. I mean, a total witch. Truly, that woman is possessed. I cannot I cannot after reading those messages and Justin falling over himself because he was like, she's an a lister, just to he was he was almost, like, pathetic. Like, stand up for yourself at a certain point. And what's happening right now? Like, in the court system in New York, they're allowing her to I don't know. Like, it it just seems like it's a very corrupt case. But what happened to Justin Baldoni, it is everyone should be reading those messages and realizing what the New York Times took part in, because we're seeing this happen over and over again, where the media like, the journalists are acting like assassins. Right? These are these are assassins. These are assassinations. Right? You're going to hit someone. You're gonna hit their entire career. Speaker 0: They're called hit pieces. Speaker 1: They're called hit pieces for a reason because most people cannot survive them. Like, Matt Lauer did not survive it. Okay? That's over. No. To New Zealand. Yeah. Yeah. I didn't know he moved to New Zealand. Speaker 0: Yeah. He did. Speaker 1: Yeah. He did not survive it. Michael Jackson to this day, you don't know the facts of Michael Jackson case. Right? You know, do you think he did it? Blah blah blah. Speaker 0: Well, I would say a 100% he did. I mean, I don't know anything. Speaker 1: Right. But that's the point. You don't know anything, but the media makes you think you do. Enough that you can have an assessment, which I was like you. Michael Jackson's guilty. I totally believed that. Speaker 0: Look at the guy. He had plastic surgery. He must be a child Weinstein was guilty. Exactly. Speaker 1: They enough of noise from the media, and we just we don't even look for facts anymore. And I want people who watch my show to be trained in recognizing those patterns when actually they're saying a lot, but they're not really saying much. You are watching a team of trained assassins take someone out. For what reason? I don't know. Then we can become you know, we can come up with conspiracies. But that's what this is. Right? That's what this is. You're they're ignoring facts because if they had presented the facts, none of us would have thought those things about Harvey Weinstein. We would have just said he's a creep who abused his power, and he should step down because nobody who's running a company should be sleeping with all of these women and cheating on his wife. Speaker 0: Exactly. Speaker 1: Like, it's, you know, it's it's moral it's morally wrong. Yeah. Not criminally crimally It's Speaker 0: interesting how you select your stories. It's non ideological. Yeah. It's Your your your your interest seems to be, is it true or not? Speaker 1: Mhmm. It's principled. I don't care how you vote. I don't care if you give up to ADL. I'm on their list. Like, I'm literally on ADL's list, and Harvey Weinstein seems like one of their biggest donors. Doesn't matter to me. Do I think he did this thing? Why does it matter? Because my sons have to grow up in that world. I have three sons. So, yeah, I have a stake in this. We can't just have women going to the New York Times and making allegations. There was also New York Times with Harvey Weinstein. They were awarded Pulitzers. And we can't just have this happening. We can't have people having their lives ruined by the press absent any facts. And so there are tons of people that come to me and want me to take on their stories, and I I try to take on as many as I can. You know, right now, I'm obviously very much interested in the Epstein case, and so that's where I'm focusing my attention, the Epstein case. Speaker 0: What do you think that was? The Epstein case. Speaker 1: I would say Israel, obviously. And, again, I'm so tired of us being gaslit. It's the the dumbest gaslighting of all time. On record okay. When Pam Bondi said like, I I just don't even You're getting swept up. Like, I was I just I mean, this was just a moment where I was like, okay, like, f you. You guys hate us. Like, you just, you don't even have so much power. Why don't you just come out and say, nana boo boo, you can't touch us, f you. I would rather you do that. Right? Yes. Then put on this pretense of a conference and then you've got Trump over here being like, does anybody still care about Jeffrey Epstein? And then Pam Bondi is asked the question, you know, was he working for another country? And she says, we don't know. Right? You don't know? So in my series, I'm like, maybe we can help them. Maybe we can help the deep state figure out who Jeffrey Epstein was working for. Here is Ari Ben Menoch, who was a Mossad agent, who is on record, literally recorded. Let's listen to him tell us about how Jeffrey Epstein was working for the Mossad. Okay. Ari Ben Menach worked for Mossad, he's saying that Robert Maxwell brought him to Jeffrey Epstein and said, let this guy in. He's gonna be involved in weapons. Hey, Pam Bondi. You might have missed this one. Okay. You might have missed this one. Then you go to another person who is on record, who is Viktor Ottrovsky, who defected from the Mossad notoriously. The Mossad admits he worked for the Mossad. He wrote a book by deception or or by deception only. He says that's the Mossad motto, which they obviously do that. That's why they, you know, execute all these false flags. And he told everybody the truth. He has said Jeffrey Epstein was working with us. So for whatever reason, Candace Owens is able to determine whether or not Jeffrey Epstein might have been working for another state, but Pam Bondi, they're just gonna have to keep surmising about whether or not Jeffrey Epstein, who who with Ghislaine Maxwell, her father being Robert Maxwell, one of the biggest lies, by the way, that's that's told, and I debunked this in our first or our third Epstein episode, is the idea that, oh, well, yeah, Robert Maxwell, they admit he was a Mossad agent, but Epstein didn't know him. They the the story they try to tell now in fashion to the public is like Ghislain and Jeffrey Epstein met after her dad was dead. That's just false. Again, Ari Ben Menach tells a story of being brought into the office and being told that Epstein was gonna be brought in. This was the Iran Contra scandal. So since the eighties, Jeffrey Epstein has been working for Israel. I don't know how I know that, and Trump and Pam Bondi don't, but they gotta bring me in. Like, I might have some evidence here. Right? It's like so it's we're getting to a point now Speaker 0: You're gonna have tough confirmation hearings. Speaker 1: I just I just want them to say, f you. Like, seriously, that would feel better at this point if they just came out and said, f you. Nada, boo boo. You can't touch us. We rule over you. That would feel at least authentic going back to the Tail of the Wrench thing. You know? I'd be like, I really don't like that, but at least it's authentic, and I know you mean it, and it's true. Speaker 0: All totally fair. Yeah. Does does any of I mean, to the extent that we can project forward and guess, does does any of this come out, I mean, to a great extent than it has? I mean, do is there ever, a public resolution of this story? Speaker 1: No. Because Israel's controlling our government. So, no. The answer is no. Trump is powerless against him. We haven't had I don't think we've been a sovereign nation since they shot JFK. And when I say they, it's like, people online say, what do you mean by they? I'm talking about Israel. I don't want you guys to, like, you know, read it. I'm talking about Israel. So, like, let's making that a taboo subject because they've gone mask down. Everything they're doing is demonic. I want nothing to do with it. I will never support Israel into the future after what they've to these children, the starvation campaign. I I don't care. Okay. Please write your own. You've already written them all. I don't know what you could add right about me, but I do not support Israel, and I don't think that Jewish Americans should support Israel, and I hope that they're now having those conversations. I see many of them recognizing that they have been propagandized into believing they have to support this demonic state, and that's in large part thanks to their birthright trip. Yeah. That mask down moment for Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL when he got caught on the hot mic, it was released. He didn't know that he was being recorded, and he's, like, saying that they gotta get TikTok under control. He's like, we have a generational issue with TikTok. We need to do something about this like what we did with birthright. What does that tell you? That the entire purpose of that birthright trip telling every Jewish American, you forget a free trip to Israel was to propagandize you into believing that you have some affinity with this made up country in The Middle East, you know, in 1948, that you have to, you know, react when something's happening to them or you have to look away when they're doing things that are so obviously wrong and demonic. So And I'm hoping now that we're getting to that point where people can recognize that whether you're black, you don't have to agree with BLM, whether you're allowing your identity to shape your morality is problematic. Okay? And Israel, in and of itself, is the demonic nation. I will never support Israel. Right? So I went from working for PragerU to I will never support Israel. And so that's how much the scales have fallen from my eyes about what they are involved in. And if you this isn't your wake up call to just look at the footage of what they are doing. They're playing hunger games and, like, throwing food at them and then killing people and seeing who survives. You I mean, it's it's just at your fingertips. You have to take a look at what Israel is doing. Speaker 0: Your point that if you allow your identity to determine your morality is a very deep, and I think important point that I've never heard any I've never heard anybody put it that way, but it does feel like we're moving toward a world in which, you know, all ethics are situational, and it all depends on who I am and who my tribe is and what my identity is. And there isn't, to the extent there used to be, a sense of, like, universal standards that apply to everyone, otherwise known as principles. You clearly operate by those principles. Does that accelerate, or do we return to a moment where we can say, oh, no. There are universal standards of behavior. Truth is an unchanging thing. Whether we have it or not is debatable, but there is something called truth. There is a an actual reality. Or does AI just make all of it like Speaker 1: I think the people that we're fighting wish that AI could make everything. I I am troubled by AI. I'm troubled by people believing that AI is smart. It's obviously dumb. It isn't it it it requires you not to read books and to believe that everything it spins out, which is is really just they're scraping the Internet. Right? That's all it's doing. Which derivative of what they're the same people. Yeah. New York Times. It's like they're scraping the trusted sources and telling you this is a fact when it's not a fact. And but I very much believe that something is happening globally right now spiritually. I think me even surviving last year is proof of that, obviously. If lies were Speaker 0: Well, and and not just surviving, I should point out since you're not a braggart. I mean, thriving in a way that, like, nobody would have predicted as, you know, measured by your numbers on your podcast, as measured by your family output. Now you're the mother of four. Like, I don't know. I don't even know how you, like, have a baby in the middle of all that, but you did. You're you're thriving Yeah. Which is amazing. I never would have guessed that ever. Speaker 1: I hope that people take away from me living through it and surviving and coming out the other side is that it's it's isn't it isn't worth your soul to tell a lie. You know? Tell the truth. And that seems harder. Like, that certainly in that moment of temptation feels harder when you're being promised the world. If you just don't say this thing, you know, everything will stay the same. If you just pretend like you don't see what's happening in Gaza, you know, you can have your life the way that you like it, That is, in my viewpoint, that that is being tempted by Satan. That really is. And that is why they want you to be attached to money. Right? That is why they don't even know how to try to destroy me outside of saying, we're gonna financially crush you. Right? We're gonna keep you in lawsuits. We're gonna sue you. I'm gonna sue you for $8,000,000,000, because there's no truth in these people. Like, like, money is all that is the only motive. That's their only real power. And so I hope that when people, the the, you know, the millions of people that listen to my podcast every single day, that they get that there is there is something way bigger than that, way higher authority to that. And when you commit yourself to truth, right, what is Jesus? Jesus is the way, and the truth, and the life. Right? I think that once you get through that temptation, you are rewarded if you do the right thing. If you do the moral thing, and you do the principle thing, you're being tested. We're all being tested right now. That's what I truly believe. We're all being tested, and a lot of people are failing that test. But a lot of people aren't. Right? Strange bedfellows. You had Anna Kasparian on this show. I've been saying for a while that I liked her because I perceived that she was being authentic even when I disagreed with her. Speaker 0: Well, she's authentic. Speaker 1: Yeah. I was like, I disagree with her. And she's been terrible to me, but I perceive that she's being authentic. And we're seeing that happen. It's a good thing. It's a good thing that the left and the right are coming together on this topic and that it doesn't matter if you're black or you're white. And so in that way, yeah, Israel, what's like, Israel has been a blessing because I think for the first time, the entire world is in lockstep realizing something is very wrong, that this is allowed to happen in broad daylight, and no one is stopping it. Speaker 0: When you say you see something happening globally on the spiritual level, what do you mean? Speaker 1: What I mean by that is I can and and, obviously, I'm looking at my own metrics here, but we have people committed to watching my show all over the world, like, using VPNs to watch this show all over the world. And as I because I don't view myself as an authority. I'm learning with them. I think that's what they enjoy about my show is I'm not like Jake Topper sitting up here telling you she's deranged. I'm actually saying, we're not getting answers here. Did did you actually use Speaker 0: the word deranged? Speaker 1: Like, six times in the first minute. Deranged? Deranged, like, six times in the first minute. It was it was glorious. It was so funny. Speaker 0: It's like a clinical diagnosis. Speaker 1: I mean, come on. Speaker 0: Have you seen a doctor? Speaker 1: Oh, yeah. You know who taught that theory of just diagnosing it? Yeah. Sigmund Freud. Oh, there we go. So I recognize what you're doing. I read the book. I read the book. You won't grok AI me. I know what you guys are about. Yeah. If you if you was telling the truth, just diagnose it. But, yeah, I guess that's what they do. They diagnose it. But, yeah, I think we are seeing all around the world, people are kind of waking up to that, and they're responding to it, and they tried to crush you. They tried to crush you. You're lucky you're not an ex because all they do is try to crush you're trending all the time over the most mundane things. I am. I love their hatred of Darrell Cooper. I love it because when you see him, he's like a nice historian. Speaker 0: And he really is. Speaker 1: But the world can see that. Right? So that's why it works. That's why you say you asked me the question, Candace, why do you have so much joy? Because it is funny. Right? And I think that my joy makes them even angrier because I think it's so ridiculous. You're trying to sell to me that this guy Daryl Cooper is the second coming of Adolf Hill. Like, that's funny. And then it makes people curious because you're going, he's so clearly not. So what is it that he's hit upon that has you guys so triggered? It's gotta be a truth. Let me keep digging. And, yeah, you as soon as you start, like, asking any questions about the World War two narrative, which has been decided in our textbooks, which were printed by Robert Maxwell. Okay. Let's just we're getting into that our Epstein series, you know, who who he who prints the textbook is king, you start asking other questions. Right? How has my mind been shaped since I was a child? Why do I feel this way? Why do I have an emotional response to these things that I don't understand? And that was set up for you. We were set up to not ask questions about certain things. And so now they're arriving at their final point, and this is why I love it so much, is that we've now forced them into a corner where their legitimate argument, as if it couldn't get more absurd, is that we have to just stop asking questions. Right? You're not just asking questions. This is their new thing. You, you're not just asking questions. Why are you asking questions? Say what you really mean. They're the ones that are so clearly undone Speaker 0: I know. Speaker 1: That we can't even ask questions. So we're waiting. Speaker 0: Thing is I actually am asking questions. Speaker 1: We all are. Speaker 0: I don't really understand a lot of things. Speaker 1: Right. We all are. We're reading and we're learning, and that scares them. So what does that tell you when exploring and learning and true education outside of the public school system terrifies them. What does it tell you? That they're hiding something. They're lying about something. Speaker 0: Of Speaker 1: course. You think I would be scared if you were asking questions and I knew the answers to them? I'd be like, yeah. No. Here, you can come examine this a thousand times. Like, you're you're lying about something, and the whole world can see that. So, yeah, I'd be pretty upset if I were you too because you have been on the side of the author of lies. You've been just Liars Speaker 0: are afraid and weak, as I'd said, brittle, and you can just feel it. And I've experienced it. I've lied. And the second you lie, you're, like, afraid. Well, you're afraid, of course, the lie being exposed, but I think the fear is deeper than that. I think it I think it weakens you. Yeah. Speaker 1: And it makes you look ridiculous by Speaker 0: the That's exactly right. It's it's humiliating. So we we do have a lot of our subscribers were very excited that you were coming. Very excited. I feel like we have some overlap. So they sent in a million questions. We can answer with a couple of them. They're they're actually good questions. Here's one. I don't know if you can even answer this. What do you think of the Daily Wire now that you've been gone for a while? Speaker 1: I think I wish the best of the Daily Wire. I wouldn't have changed I wouldn't change a single thing about what happened, how it went down. In the moment, it seemed so crazy, but I think in every action, people get to see who you are and what you're made of. And it's like Daily Wire got to tell their story, and I got to tell mine. So Speaker 0: So you get I mean, you were a big deal, obviously, at the Daily Wire. A little bigger than we realized. When you left, we found out what a big deal you were. So no one wants to lose a job where they're succeeding. But in retrospect, do you feel like that was part of a larger plan? Speaker 1: Yeah. God's plan for sure. Speaker 0: That's what I Speaker 1: And now with the things and the discussions that I'm having with my viewers, there's no way I could have been at the Daily Wire. Just wouldn't have worked. You know, it worked for a little bit, and then it suddenly was not working. And now we definitively we would not be a good match. And at the end the day, I just don't view myself as in competition with the Daily Wire. Like, I am interested in totally different things. Speaker 0: Well, you're a lot bigger than the Daily Wire. Just on the numbers, you're much bigger than the Daily Wire. Speaker 1: And I think that's in part because removing the Daily Wire as the conduit to my ideas was a good thing. Like, I got to I don't have to have a bunch of people as it is at any corporation. Like, can you talk about the topic? Is it okay? What are the lawyers think? Speaker 0: Right. That's right. Speaker 1: That should move all that, and I get to go right to my audience. So I'm grateful. Speaker 0: And you don't have to take credit or blame for what others on that channel do. Right. But I felt this way working for big companies. It was like, I can't believe I hate your company or I love your company. It's like, I and it's not exactly connected to me. I mean, I work there. Speaker 1: But Exactly. And I was I'm definitely somebody that I think I thrive when I get to just truly say and express myself entirely exactly how I feel every second of every day. And I'm interested in so many different topics, and it was getting increasingly difficult to kind of explore things that I was interested in without having to worry about whether it would upset this person or that person or how a legal person felt about this. And at that point, you're not having fun. Then it becomes a job. Right? It always was a job, but then it becomes a job, meaning that Oh, yeah. You're waking up every day and you're like, ugh. And now I wake up every day, and I'm thrilled, and I'm researching, and I'm learning with my audience. So I'm happier. I hope The Daily Wire is happier, and that's it. Speaker 0: Do and this is another question. Do you ever fear that something that people wanna harm you? Speaker 1: I know people wanna harm me, so I don't have to fear it. Fair. Yeah. In case you missed it, a guy tried to kill me last year. Sorry. A conflict by the FBI. There's nothing to fear. It's embrace that that people are deranged and people are crazy, and, course, people wanna harm me. Do I fear it? No. Because I don't I don't fear death. And I think that that is the true challenge of being a Christian. I asked myself this question when there are so many people who purport to be Christians and they won't say things that they know are true, or they actually say things that they know to be false because they're fearful of losing their jobs. Right? And if you are responding or you're or you're behaving in a certain way or not saying something because you're fearful of something like the moment right now, do you believe in the afterlife? Speaker 0: Do you Speaker 1: believe Exactly. In Christ? Do you know that you're actually not just trying to get paid by a check, but also trying to get into heaven? Right? That's the bigger thing. So I go for the bigger thing, and, yeah, I I know that no matter what, I will be okay. My husband makes sure that he says his number one goal is to make sure that all of us are getting into heaven. So Speaker 0: This is not the end. Yeah. Last question. Do you have advice for the president whom you know? You said you spoke by phone. I know you've been a supporter of his for a long time, but do you have advice for him now? Speaker 1: Yes. My advice to him would be my advice to very many people who I've seen become very big and then get very small or have their supporters turn on them, which is don't ever get to the point where you think you're smarter than your audience. And I think that for Trump right now, and I'm speaking specifically about the gaslighting of why we're still talking about Jeffrey Epstein and then saying, I don't want any supporters that are still into this. That means that you see yourself as a king, and you've stopped listening. You're not responding to the movement anymore. And what made us get behind you was that despite the fact that we knew you were this boisterous billionaire, was that you had a way of communicating with and understanding how people felt. Right? The blue collar worker, how that person felt, the person that's listening to you, the truck driver, the plumbers. And when you respond with, well, I don't want your support or gaslighting, you know, you've lost touch a little bit your audience. Just don't ever think that you're smarter than your audience. I'm constantly getting feedback from my audience and trying to figure out what they're interested in and how I can be better, even if slight tweaks of things like, oh, I don't like the way the audio sounds or this, and they like that. They know because then they know that you care, and I do care. And I think that Trump's message over the last few weeks with the Epstein fumble, as I'm going to refer to it as, makes people think that he doesn't care. And I think he does care, so he should change that. Speaker 0: I think that's very wise advice. I think that's the wisest advice you could give, not surprisingly. Speaker 1: Got kids. Speaker 0: So my last question is, what is because I I do I was thinking about you in my song this morning. You do have, like, a obvious peace and joy about you. It's just it's just obvious. It's not fake. It's just with you and your husband and your youngest child off camera, and it's totally real. What is your spiritual practice? Speaker 1: Well, we're Catholic. My family's Catholic. I when George and I first got married, I was not Catholic. I was Protestant. And to see just God's design and everything and how me and George met and how he then was so drawn back into his faith, like, he was I would definitely say he was not a practicing Catholic when we got married, or else he would have told me that I had to convert before we got married actually, because he's that he's that deep into the faith now. But our marriage has brought us closer to faith, and I made the decision, not knowing how all this is gonna play out, but to become baptized into the Catholic church. And it's just interesting how, you know, there's so there there is a divine aspect to everything that's happening, the timing of everything. I never question God's timing, even when things seem terrible. Right? When the whole world is rooting for you to fail, saying she's canceled and it's over. The reason why I survived it and the reason why I'm happy is because I have real faith, and also because I know that that's just a veneer that's been created for us, the idea that, like, your media and that if The New York Times can take you out, you you don't have enough substance in your life. They're they can't threaten me because they they haven't created anything that's real in my life. They don't they have no control over anything that's real in my life. And if you think I care about a headline, I couldn't care less about a headline. You're gonna try to get me canceled from speaking at an event. Like, okay. They're probably serving rubber chicken anyways if that goes through crates. Amazing. And that's not gonna be enough of a threat for me to give up speaking truth because and this is the part that I really wanna get to because it's super important for people to hear this. I'm encouraged when people say that I give them the courage. Right? That's the greatest thing. That's the greatest compliment that I can receive, that they were quiet about something, and now they are vocal about it because they realize it matters. Our children are going to inherit the worlds that we allow them to inherit. So if we decide to become creatures of, you know, pleasure, and creatures of social media, and creatures of a lack of focus, and ultimately, creatures of fear and cowardice, they will inherit the world, right, that that that we've left behind for them. It's so important to stand up for what's right because your children, if you don't stand up for the demons, those demons are only gonna grow more powerful. Speaker 0: That's right. Speaker 1: And your children are going to be the ones that suffer it. Right? So the question is, do you care enough about it to protect your children? To moms and dads. Right? When you say, didn't say the thing, so I just went along with the COVID thing, you would allow them to poison your kids, like, because you were just scared to say something. And again, because we live in a society of of pleasure, and we live in the everything's so momentary and social media and a distraction, we've actually become a very weakened species. Like, I am so driven by who my grandfather was. I always say this. Like, people are like, what's up with this girl? Why are so happy? I say, my grandfather blessed me. He spoiled me, and I just looked up looked at him as such a man, like truly what it means like to embody faith, his family. It was all that he cared about. Faith, family. And he could look you in the eye and do a deal on a handshake. Right? If he said he was gonna be there, he was gonna be there. If he said he wasn't gonna be he was gonna do this, he was gonna do that. You know? We need to go back to that. We've lost that in this society. Everyone's so deceptive and sneaky, and they don't say what they mean, and there's contracts, and they're tricky contracts, and everyone's leaking stuff to the press. It's have some respect, you know, for yourself and for your family to be a better person and to speak up when something is wrong. Speaker 0: Amen. I can improve on that. Candace Owens, thank you Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Speaker 0: For taking all this time, and congratulations. I think that your example even if people disagree with you, I think they have to say this is a woman who's surely sincere, and I don't think there's a higher compliment. So Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you so much. A lot coming from you.

@shellenberger — Michael Shellenberger

Posted - September 3, 2025 at 2:53 PM

Saved - September 3, 2025 at 6:45 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The Twitter Files reveal a coordinated effort by French President Emmanuel Macron and state-affiliated NGOs to pressure Twitter into censoring users for legal speech. Macron sought direct communication with then-CEO Jack Dorsey amid escalating lawsuits from NGOs claiming Twitter failed to address hate speech. These actions appear to be part of a broader strategy to control narratives and influence social media moderation practices, reflecting France's historical role in censorship. The investigation highlights the implications for free speech and the need for US firms to uphold First Amendment standards.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

🚨TWITTER FILES – FRANCE At this moment, the Trump administration is negotiating with the EU over final obstacles to a trade deal, one of which is European censorship of US social media platforms. Many analysts believe the massive size of the EU will lead US social media firms to impose European censorship, including on Americans. Last year, the EU’s then-top digital censor, Thierry Breton, threatened action against Elon Musk after he announced a conversation on X with Donald Trump. Now, new TWITTER FILES show a coordinated effort by France’s President Emmanuel Macron, legislators, and state-affiliated NGOs working together to force the world’s most influential social media platform to censor users for legal speech and influence Twitter’s worldwide “content moderation” for narrative control. What’s more, TWITTER FILES - FRANCE reveals the birth of the censorship-by-NGO proxy strategy at the heart of the Censorship Industrial Complex: — President Macron personally reached out to then-CEO of Twitter, Jack Dorsey; — The timing of Macron’s action strongly suggests coordination with NGOs on a pressure campaign to win more censorship and demand sensitive user data from Twitter; — The pattern of events indicates potentially illegal activity by various actors. The TWITTER FILES FRANCE investigation was led by @McmahonPascal and @battleforeurope, and edited by @galexybrane and @shellenberger. We are releasing the Files here on X and simultaneously publishing a comprehensive report by Clerótte and Fazi on France’s invention of the Censorship Industrial Complex.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

2. “President Macron wants to text Jack” On October 14, 2020, Twitter’s Public Policy Director for France and Russia wrote, “President Macron's team has been asking me (again!) Jack's number because the President wants to text him some supporting words re our new policies and functionalities on Election integrity.” There was one issue, though – Dorsey did not give out his contact information, even to heads of state. “I have already advised that he could send him a DM. I'll push back again, but wanted to double check with you first that indeed Jack never shares his number,” the policy director wrote. Public requested a response from President Macron and did not hear back.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

3. “Macron only sends texts to people he is close to and works frequently with…” The first reply came from Twitter's Global Vice President of Public Affairs, who copied Vijaya Gadde, one of the platform's chief censors. This Global Vice President of Public Affairs noted, “I know that Macron only sends texts to people he is close to and works frequently with colleagues and senior govt. leaders (like Angela Merkel) over text. [redacted] - could you pls. ask Jack if he would be willing to accept a text from Macron, and we will ask Macron's team only to share Jack's number with Macron? Thanks.” Dorsey’s office replied, “Will circle w Jack. Is there an alternative? FYI: Jack doesn’t have a phone number (I swear) and only immediate team has his contact info to get a hold of him.” “I am really pushing for DM but apparently Macron doesn’t use Twitter by himself and wants to do a personal note. Maybe a telegram or signal.” This was followed by a review of various potential communication channels, including email, Signal, Telegram, and iMessage. But why was Macron so desperate to get in contact with Dorsey?

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

4. CONTEXT: Escalating lawfare and censorship under Macron’s presidency France has long presented itself as the cradle of modern democratic ideals, born of the Revolution of 1789 and enshrined in the motto “Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité.” In reality, few Western governments have more sway on free speech than France. The French government and its Censorship Industrial Complex have used various methods, including judicial intimidation, to demand censorship from social media platforms. In August last year, French police arrested Pavel Durov, the founder of the social media company Telegram, and held him for four days. France indicted him on a staggering list of charges, including complicity in organized crime, criminal conspiracy, and facilitating terrorism. Durov has alleged that the director of France's foreign intelligence service urged him to suppress conservative voices on Telegram in the wake of Romania’s presidential election rerun, which followed its cancellation.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

5. “This case is largely about painting Twitter as a dangerous actor in the press.” Macron’s request for Dorsey’s number appears to be linked with the simultaneous launch of a lawsuit by four French government-linked NGOs against Twitter. “We were sued back in the spring by four NGOs claiming that we are not doing enough to address hate speech in France (and comparing us unfavorably with Facebook and others),” wrote Karen Colangelo, Associate Director of Litigation, Regulatory, and Competition at Twitter, in an October 19, 2020, email to colleagues. “They seek to have an expert appointed to examine our reporting and enforcement systems.” Colangelo didn’t think the goal of the NGOs was to win the lawsuit, which was without merit. Rather, she said, “This case is largely about painting Twitter as a dangerous actor in the press.” The lawsuit was filed against Twitter by the French NGOs SOS Racisme, SOS Homophobie, the Union of Jewish Students of France (UEJF), and J’accuse, claiming that Twitter failed to remove hate speech in a timely manner. These NGOs appear to be backed by the French government and the EU. SOS Racisme is a partner in an EU program, and UEJF is a member of the European Union of Jewish students, which receives support from the EU. SOS Homophobie receives funding from the French government, and is affiliated with the EU through its international LGBTQ youth program. The NGOs did not respond to our request for comment.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

6. “They are concerned that we let users Tweet anonymously” Following a mediation session with the NGOs on November 7, 2020, Colangelo updated her colleagues: “The NGOs articulated their concerns, which, broadly speaking, are (1) they feel we are not actioning hate speech quickly enough (and, in their view, sometimes not at all), (2) they want additional transparency into how we handle hate speech reports and proactively monitor for hate speech content, and (3) they are concerned that we let users Tweet anonymously — they believe this allows perpetrators of hate speech to evade detection/punishment.” After a third mediation session, Colangelo noted, “We had our third session today and actually made some minor progress. They asked us specifically about five particular accounts that they believe should be suspended. We are going to re-review those accounts and see whether there is a basis to suspend.” Twitter appeared ready to cooperate with French censors.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

7. “I am not surprised that they are trying now to go back to court and make some public statement…” Twitter executives knew the timing of the NGOs’ lawsuit was not coincidental. “From a public policy standpoint,” wrote Audrey Herblin-Stoop, Twitter’s Public Policy Director for France and Russia, to her colleagues, “as you all may remember, their announcement of the lawsuit was made right before the final reading of the Avia bill and was aimed to support the vote of the bill.” The Avia bill was the new French censorship law, ostensibly intended to “combat online hate speech” and censor illegal content. “So,” she added, “I am not surprised that they are trying now to go back to court and make some public statement just ahead of the comeback of the hate speech regulation in the coming weeks.” The supposedly “nongovernmental” organizations’ lawsuit thus appears to have not been a spontaneous response to online abuse but part of a broader, coordinated effort by the French government, in which state-funded and politically connected NGOs acted in concert with government actors, including President Macron himself, to pressure social media companies to censor, and strengthen the hand of the French state in censoring its political opponents.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

8. CONTEXT: France invented the Censorship Industrial Complex 53 years ago From royal censors to revolutionary tribunals, Napoleonic decrees to Vichy oppression, France’s history has long been defined by the tug-of-war between censorship and free speech. France’s 1972 Pleven Law was a direct response to mounting political tensions and disputes over mass migration. Ostensibly aimed at combating racism by criminalizing incitement to hatred, defamation, or insults based on race, ethnicity, or religion, the law empowered two state-accredited, partially state-funded NGOs to act as “private prosecutors” with the power to initiate criminal indictments as third parties. This created a potent weapon: NGOs, often ideologically driven and well-resourced, could launch costly, reputation-destroying lawsuits against critics or dissenting voices, imposing in effect a system at the root of the DSA and its “trusted third parties” tasked with censoring the internet. The Pleven Law opened Pandora’s box. The 1980s witnessed an explosion of NGOs frequently acting as proxies for political parties or interest groups. These groups relentlessly lobbied for accreditation and expanded powers to initiate indictments in new domains, such as sexual orientation, turning lawfare into a core political strategy. Over time, the scope of speech that could be penalized or censored expanded dramatically. Starting in the early 2010s, these groups initiated a string of legal actions against Twitter over allegedly hateful content, targeting antisemitic hashtags, Holocaust denial, or homophobic abuse. By 2012, France was already the global leader in censorship requests to Twitter, demanding “pre-bunking” measures.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

9. Macron Leads Censorship Effort The year 2016 marked an inflection point in the state’s crackdown on online speech. Events like Brexit, Trump’s victory, the Arab Spring, and France’s Yellow Vest movement, organized via social media, convinced elites that “information disorders” represented an existential threat to their power. A consensus thus emerged: digital platforms needed to be regulated to curb the rise of populism. This led Macron to launch a legislative onslaught. Under Macron’s presidency, France: — mandated that platforms implement "misinformation detection”; — gave platforms a 24-hour window to remove “hateful” content, and required platforms to remove “deepfakes”; — launched VIGINUM, a counter-disinformation agency created in July 2021, which likely played a role in the contentious cancellation of the first round of Romania’s 2024 presidential election. This pattern of activity suggests a concerted effort by Macron and his allies to police global speech and elections.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

10. “—we were planning to confidentially disclose some information sought by the NGOs to them in exchange for them dropping the suit” The NGOs would not settle, despite Twitter’s efforts to cooperate. And so Twitter caved, offering to censor its platform — for all users — in exchange for an end to the lawfare. “An update on the French hate speech matter: back in January we thought we were nearing a settlement,” wrote Twitter’s Associate Director of Litigation, Regulatory, and Competition on February 23, 2021,”[W]e were planning to confidentially disclose some information sought by the NGOs to them in exchange for them dropping the suit. After some weeks (and, apparently, in-fighting among the plaintiffs), they came back to us with a counter-offer that was ultimately unacceptable.” What made the counter-offer unacceptable, she explained, is that “they have refused to make any firm commitment to drop their lawsuit.” In other words, even with access to Twitter’s data, the NGOs wanted to continue their suit. Why? The answer appears to be to create public pressure for greater platform censorship. And Twitter execs knew it. “We anticipate negative press on the ‘failure’ of the mediation, and comms has prepared a reactive statement,” the litigation director wrote. “It is likely the NGOs will try to paint us as failing to cooperate/negotiate in good faith and that we don’t care about/intentionally profit from hate speech. While I believe these characterizations are false and made in bad faith, these are the common themes we have heard from the NGOs throughout the mediation.”

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

11. “We should be cognisant of the precedent we are setting here which could trigger more asks of this nature into the future.” Twitter also agreed to send a letter from CEO Jack Dorsey to the NGOs, promising stronger action in the future. The “plaintiffs in the UEJF hate speech case are now suggesting that they would be willing to settle the case so long as we provide them with a letter from Jack indicating that he is aware of the case and that the company is committed to fighting hate speech,” wrote Twitter attorney Karen Colangelo on March 9, 2021. “If we can really get the case to go away by just providing this letter, litigation recommends we provide it.” “I think Jack will be supportive,” responded Twitter Acting General Counsel, Sean Edgett, a few hours later. Twitter’s head of public policy responded, “We're supportive of this move and will work with our comms colleagues on the inevitable press cycle that will follow if this letter is leaked. We should also be cognisant of the precedent we are setting here which could trigger more asks of this nature into the future.”

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

12. “Notably, the lawsuit was very strategically timed…” On March 10, 2021, Colangelo wrote up a brief for Edgett to share with Dorsey on why they wanted the letter. “The lawsuit is one part of a larger effort in France to paint Twitter as a bad actor. Notably, the lawsuit was very strategically timed to begin ‘testing’ of our response rate the day after we announced that our response times would be impacted by COVID-19, many of the ‘hateful’ Tweets included in the 88% we did not remove are not actually illegal under French law or actionable under our TOS, and the suit was publicly announced to coincide with the introduction of the Avia hate speech bill which, according to its author, was motivated by Twitter’s refusal to remove hate speech.” Then, on March 23, Colangelo told her colleagues that the NGOs had “changed their minds” about the letter from Jack Dorsey and “decided that it was insufficient.” The good news, she said, was that “the mediators (who have the ear of the judge) are frustrated with the NGOs and believe they acted in bad faith.” On July 6, 2021, Twitter’s French attorney announced that the Court had dismissed NGOs claims based on lack of standing but ordered Twitter to give the NGOs “any documents relating to the resources dedicated to fighting hate speech… the number, location, nationality and language of the persons assigned to moderation…the number of reports from users of the French platform of its services, concerning apology for crimes against humanity and incitement to racial hatred” and related information. On August 16, 2021, a Twitter executive in Ireland emailed Deputy General Counsel Jim Baker, former General Counsel of the FBI, to say that “the French Constitutional Court handed down its decision on Friday on the new French law that places requirements on Twitter to take a number of significant steps in respect to how we treat content moderation in France. The bill will be enacted by the President in the next few days and enforceable immediately.”

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

13. Macron Attempts to Circumvent French Law The apparent coordination between the NGOs, the hate speech bill, and Macron’s attempt to contact Dorsey could easily be seen as attempts to circumvent the law. Under French law, the state is barred from imposing preemptive censorship — a practice referred to internally at Twitter as “proactive monitoring.” The government has attempted to bypass the law by using state-funded NGOs as enforcers, acting public pressure and strategic litigation to coerce platforms into moderation practices that exceed their legal obligations. Under Macron, the state is determined to undermine the international “country-of-origin” standard, which holds that digital content must comply with the laws of the country where it is produced, not where it is consumed.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

14. Miss France's attorney demands censorship: "What would have happened if Twitter was around in 1942? Would they have allowed Hitler to speak?" The NGOs cited displeasure with how Twitter was handling alleged online harassment of Miss France. "Despite Plaintiffs' initial insistence that they were done with the mediation, for the first time, Plaintiffs have expressed that they may be willing to drop their case if we give them some information about our moderation practices." On February 23, 2021, Twitter attorney Colangelo wrote to her colleagues, “Note that there was a hearing today on the request from Miss France, April Benayoum, for us to disclose information about various accounts that were allegedly making anti-semitic comments about her.” Benayoum had sued Twitter for failing to act quickly. “Plaintiffs have expressed they may be willing to drop their case if we give them some information about our moderation practices,” wrote Colangelo to her colleagues in January. But, as with the NGOs, her main goal appeared to be negative publicity — and the acquisition of internal Twitter Data. “Ms. Benayoum's attorney made a number of emotional arguments that might get press attention,” wrote Colangelo, “including talking about the Holocaust, WWII, Adolf Hitler, etc. -- one question he posed to the court is ‘What would have happened if Twitter was around in 1942? Would they have allowed Hitler to speak?’” Benayoum’s lawsuit demanded extensive internal data from Twitter, including dates and times of Tweet and account removal, and details about Twitter’s process for removing tweets proactively. While the court on April 13, 2021, dismissed most of her claims and acknowledged that Twitter France had no operational control over moderation, which was managed by Twitter International in Ireland, they still ordered disclosures of data relating to reports made to French authorities. The case concluded in a confidential settlement, demonstrating once again how legal action can pressure platforms into concessions. On June 7, 2022, Twitter settled with Miss France.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

15. “Twitter's moderation… can undermine public order and the proper functioning of our society.” French courts in 2022 prosecuted then-Twitter France CEO, Damien Viel for alleged “non compliance with a judicial injunction” and “complicity to libel.” The issue? A unit of the Ministry of Interior posted a picture of a high-ranking civil servant inspecting policemen tasked with enforcing Covid lockdowns, and replies from Twitter users compared the French Police to those of Philippe Petain’s Nazi-collaborationist regime. Twitter users dubbed the high-ranking civil servant a “Nazi,” and called for “hanging him at the Liberation.” The litigation appears to have been part of the pressure campaign to expand Twitter’s transparency and hate speech obligations in France. The Versailles prosecutor launched an investigation for libel of a public official and delivered an injunction to Twitter for user ID information. But Twitter France’s CEO did not have access to any user data, which were stored by Twitter International Corporation in Ireland. After the Versailles prosecutor decided Twitter had not responded quickly enough, he charged Viel on the grounds of “the total failure of Twitter's moderation, which has become a completely asocial network that can undermine public order and the proper functioning of our society.”

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

16. “How likely do you think a raid is on the Twitter France office?” It was a show trial that failed to persuade the judge. “Damien was just perfect,” wrote Twitter’s French attorney in a July 9, 2021 email to Twitter executives about the hearing. “The police officer was very courteous and hardly convinced by the usefulness of his mission and by the instructions he received.” Still, Twitter’s French lawyer warned, “the prosecutor could increase the pressure on Twitter France by ordering a raid on the company's Paris premises. I don't know what he could find there. However, the risk does exist and we would need to discuss it.” “How likely do you think a raid is on the Twitter France office?” asked the Associate Director of Litigation, Regulatory, and Competition. “It is quite impossible to assess how important the risk of a raid is,” the lawyer answered. I can only say that it does exist and the Prosecutor has such power within the frame of a criminal investigation.” The case ended with Viel and Twitter France being cleared of all charges in March 2022.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

17. France is now going after Elon Musk’s X In July 2025, a Paris prosecutor launched a criminal investigation into Elon Musk’s X and its management for alleged interference with an IT system, fraudulent data extraction, and foreign interference. These are significant cybercrime offenses that carry penalties under the criminal code, including up to ten years in prison and a fine of €300,000. Why is France prosecuting X? The answer appears to be that it wants to force X into compliance with French government-approved narratives. The courts have also targeted Marine Le Pen, France’s leading opposition figure. A court found her guilty of embezzling EU funds — for political campaigning purposes — and sentenced her to four years in prison. The punishment includes a five-year ban on holding public office. The court ordered this penalty to take place before Le Pen can appeal, which prevents her from competing in the presidential race, in which she is the frontrunner. For identical charges, the current Prime Minister was acquitted.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

18. The US Must Resist Global Censorship The TWITTER FILES - FRANCE reveals a previously unknown aspect of the rise of the Censorship Industrial Complex, which is that nation’s role in pioneering government censorship-by-NGO proxy, which was at the heart of the US Department of Homeland Security’s censorship efforts. The active involvement of Macron underscores the high importance the government put on influencing social media platforms to create, control, and censor narratives. And Macron’s apparent coordination with NGOs and members of Parliament on a Twitter pressure campaign reveals a high level of thought, calculation, and strategy, similar to the “influence operations” and censorship advocacy that Intelligence Community-adjacent NGOs carried out in the US and other nations. The Trump administration has said it is committed to free speech diplomacy and may be pursuing that with Europe. The TWITTER FILES - FRANCE dramatically illustrates the importance of protecting the First Amendment, and why US companies should operate under it, and not a lower standard of free speech.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

19. Read the full investigation by @McmahonPascal and @battleforeurope here: https://www.civilizationworks.org/cw-master-blog/france-invented-the-censorship-industrial-complex-the-twitter-files-france-case-studies /END

How France Invented the Censorship Industrial Complex — Civilization Works civilizationworks.org

@ProjectConstitu — Project Constitution

Posted - December 2, 2025 at 4:27 PM

Saved - December 2, 2025 at 6:13 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I connect the dots the media won’t touch: Owens claims a French official says Macron green-lit her assassination with a $1.5M payoff; a network including Israeli assets is tied to Kirk’s case. The shooter’s identity is disputed by a French source, who hints training by the French Foreign Legion. Tennessee Gov. Lee meets Israeli diplomats and oversees a $1.5B Orano deal, while silence comes from FBI, the Élysée, and the governor. Anti-Macron voices targeted; archives scrubbed. Demand accountability.

@ProjectConstitu - Project Constitution

🚨EXPOSED: TENNESSEE Just Became GROUND ZERO For The CANDACE OWENS / CHARLIE KIRK COVER-UP Let’s connect the dots the media refuses to touch: 1️⃣ Candace Owens (who lives in Tennessee) goes public: A high-level French government official warns her that Macron personally green-lit her assassination. $1.5 million allegedly paid. Squad includes one Israeli operative + French Foreign Legion assets. Same network allegedly behind Charlie Kirk’s public execution. 2️⃣ Candace’s French source NEVER said “Tyler Robinson” was the shooter. They said “Charlie Kirk’s assassin trained with the French Foreign Legion 13th Brigade.” Candace clarified last night: “Tyler Robinson is the patsy. He never even stepped on that campus. His only ‘job’ was dropping clothes by a Dairy Queen & cemetery to frame him.” France’s “denial” only said “Tyler Robinson was never in the Legion.” That’s not a denial — that’s a confession they know he’s not the real shooter. 3️⃣ Tennessee Governor Bill Lee’s VERY interesting calendar: • November 19 — private meeting with Israeli Consul General Eitan Weiss in Nashville, full photo op, “continued support for Israel.” • Same state just handed Macron’s government-owned company Orano 920 acres in Oak Ridge + $1.5 BILLION in incentives (Macron personally restructured Orano when he was Economy Minister). • Israel is the ONLY foreign government aggressively selling bonds directly to U.S. states — Tennessee is buying. 4️⃣ Silence is deafening: • Candace reported the threat to FBI, White House, counter-terrorism → zero public response. • Élysée Palace → zero denial of the $1.5M hit. • Governor Lee → zero comment on any of it while meeting the exact foreign players named. So let me get this straight… The two loudest anti-Macron, anti-deep-state voices in America (Charlie Kirk & Candace Owens) both get targeted. One is publicly executed. One is told she’s next. Both cases point to French + Israeli assets. And the Governor of the state where Candace lives is quietly cutting billion-dollar deals with Macron’s company and posing for photos with Israeli diplomats — weeks after the hits? 5️⃣ But wait—evidence is VANISHING: Tried pulling Macron's official 2023 Orano announcement vid from France 24 & Even the OFFICIAL Élysée Palace Archive?Straight 404 errors. YouTube embed? "This video isn't available anymore." Dug deeper: Internet Archive's Wayback Machine? ZERO snapshots archived from May 2023 onward—no traces, no redirects, nada. A routine state visit from 2+ years ago, scrubbed clean across official sites and global archives? Right as Candace exposes Macron's hit squad? This isn't "lost media"—it's a digital hit job. They're erasing the paper trail before your eyes. Share screenshots NOW before they vanish too. So let me get this straight… The two loudest anti-Macron, anti-deep-state voices in America (Charlie Kirk & Candace Owens) both get targeted. One is publicly executed. One is told she’s next. Both cases point to French + Israeli assets. And the Governor of the state where Candace lives is quietly cutting billion-dollar deals with Macron’s company and posing for photos with Israeli diplomats — weeks after the hits? Now they're memory-holing the proof? If this happened in a movie you’d call it “too obvious.” But it’s happening in real life — and they’re hoping you stay asleep. Tag someone who still thinks this is “conspiracy theory.” Tag Governor Bill Lee and demand answers.Tag @RealCandaceO, The clock is ticking.

@ProjectConstitu - Project Constitution

🚨BOMBSHELL: Utah Gov's Secret Meetings with Egypt & France Just EXPOSED – 13 Days After Kirk's Assassination! WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?😱 On Sept 10, 2025, Charlie Kirk was gunned down at UVU. The nation mourned. The manhunt raged.But 13 days later—Sept 23—Cox turned Utah's Capitol Gold Room into a clandestine hub for FOREIGN INTEL HEAVYWEIGHTS from EGYPT & FRANCE. Back-to-back. Zero public trace. What We Know: 🔴11:30 AM: Closed-door meeting with Egyptian Ambassador Motaz Zahran—D.C. intel boss bridging Egypt, Israel, US secrets. Speaks French & Arabic. 🔴3:30 PM: Closed door meeting with French Consul General Florian Cardinaux—SF-based, DGSE intel pipeline on speed dial. SAME BUILDING. SAME DAY. BURIED DEEP in internal calendars from http://governor.utah.gov. Erased from press, X, everything. No photos. No statements. Recall: Egyptian planes shadowed the hit? French Prez allegedly greenlit a strike on Candace Owens? This isn't diplomacy. This is DAMAGE CONTROL. Or WORSE. Who pulled strings to fly these spooks to SLC? What "classified" whispers exchanged while America grieved? Utah's governor—our governor—hosting enemy intel shadows in silence? @SpencerJCox @GovCoxOffice Explain This? Charlie's blood cries out. We won't forget. DEMAND ANSWERS Everyone Please FOLLOW @Mia_Stretch, She Is The Person Who Brought This To My Attention.

Governor Spencer J. Cox governor.utah.gov

@ProjectConstitu - Project Constitution

🚨 CONFIRMED: Macron's "Death Squad" Behind Candace Owens Assassination Plot? Russian Intel Confirms the Nightmare Is Real👀 Candace Owens just dropped a bombshell: A French gov't insider warns the Macrons greenlit her murder via elite Gendarmerie hit squad—with Israeli ties & https://t.co/GhSCnJenQ6

Video Transcript AI Summary

A sensational set of allegations has been put forward by the foundation for the fight against injustice, claiming that French President Emmanuel Macron is overseeing a secret death squad. The group alleges the existence of Lilly (also spelled Lily in places), a covert unit operating under the direct orders of the Elysee Palace. Lilly, described as 40 to 50 elite operatives drawn from France’s intelligence services (DGSE and DGSI), is said to be capable of killing critics with methods that mimic natural or accidental deaths, including poisonings, staged car crashes, balcony falls, and overdoses. The report centers on Alexandre Bernalla (referred to in the transcript with variants such as Bernaleau), once Macron’s trusted security aide who was dismissed, charged, and convicted after a May Day protest confrontation. The foundation claims Bernalla is now the linchpin of Lilly, orchestrating a network of killers. It also names other alleged figures: Bernard Emie, former head of the DGSE, as a key coordinator; Patrick Strolda, Macron’s chief of staff, accused of funneling funds through off-the-books channels to sustain the unit; and Laurent Nunez, a top security official, said to be in charge of recruiting operatives. If true, the allegations depict a well-funded machine backed by powerful figures within France. The claimed operation is described as a playbook straight from a spy thriller: poisonings that mimic heart attacks, car crashes that look like accidents, suicides framed from balcony falls, and overdoses designed to discredit victims. The foundation argues that the number of coincidences involving Macron’s critics—journalists, activists, and politicians—suggests a pattern beyond chance. However, there is no hard evidence tying these men directly to assassinations. The claims rely largely on anonymous testimonies from French politicians and journalists, and there are questions about the source’s transparency. The foundation’s credibility is contested, and there is an atmosphere of doubt about whether Lilly exists at all. Dismissals of the claims include speculation about coordinated smear campaigns, possibly fueled by Macron’s domestic enemies or foreign actors such as Russia, which is accused of disseminating disinformation about him. Macron’s supporters counter that he remains a reformer pursuing growth and international diplomacy, pointing to investments like the €20,000,000,000 secured at the 2025 Choose France Summit. The Elysee Palace has likewise pushback against far-fetched claims, including previous debunked rumors about Macron on trains with other European leaders, attributed to Kremlin-backed accounts. The discussion weighs whether Lilly is a genuine hidden operation or a fabrication, while acknowledging that anonymous sources and a lack of verifiable documents complicate the truth. Ultimately, the discussion frames Lilly as either a symbol of a dangerous abuse of power or a tool of disinformation, illustrating how distrust in institutions can be amplified by sensational claims. The core takeaway is that Macron’s presidency is a lightning rod, with Lilly allegations highlighting broader questions about trust in government and the fragility of democratic institutions.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: If you think the French government is all about liberty and transparency, what I'm about to tell you might shatter that illusion. Explosive allegations have surfaced, claiming president Emmanuel Macron is running a secret death squad. Yes, you heard that right. A covert team of assassins targeting journalists, politicians, and activists who dared to oppose him. Stay with me, because this story is about to take you down a rabbit hole of power, betrayal and chilling conspiracies that could redefine what you think about modern France. This isn't just another political scandal. It's a bombshell investigation from the foundation for the fight against injustice. A group claiming to have uncovered evidence of a clandestine unit operating under the direct orders of the Elysee Palace. They call it Lily, a nod to the fleur de lis, France's ancient symbol of royalty, and it's allegedly made up of 40 to 50 elite operatives, handpicked for their ability to kill without hesitation. We're talking poisonings, staged accidents, and sniper hits, all designed to look like tragic coincidences. But as these incidents pile up, the question looms. Is this the work of a democratic leader or something far darker? The accusations point to a shadowy network tied to some of Macron's closest allies, including a name you might recognize, Alexandra Benalla, a figure already infamous for his role in violent incidents. If these claims are true, they could expose a level of corruption and control that rivals the darkest chapters of political history. But before we dive deeper, let's ask ourselves, how did we get here, and why should you care? Because if a government can silence its critics in the shadows, what does that mean for freedom anywhere? The story starts with whispers, rumors that have been circulating in France's political underbelly for years. Macron, elected in 2017 as a fresh face of progressive reform, has faced mounting criticism for his handling of protests, economic policies, and foreign affairs. From the yellow vest movement to his controversial pension reforms, he's no stranger to public backlash. But according to posts found on X, the foundation for the fight against injustice has taken these criticisms to a whole new level, alleging that Macron didn't just weather opposition, he eliminated it, literally. The report claims that Lilly is a highly trained unit, drawn from the ranks of France's intelligence agencies, the DGSE and DGSI. These aren't your average hired thugs. We're talking about battle hardened veterans, operatives who've spent years in covert operations, chosen for their loyalty and their ability to execute orders without question. The Fleurs de Lis codename is particularly telling. It's a symbol tied to French monarchy, a nod to absolute power. Is Maquel, a president who's often been accused of acting like a king, leaning into that imagery? Or is this just a clever way to mask something even more sinister? At the heart of this alleged operation is Alexandre Bernalla, a name that sends chills down the spine of anyone familiar with French politics. Bernaleau was once Macron's trusted security aid, but he fell from grace in 2018 after video surfaced of him assaulting protesters during a May Day demonstration. The scandal rocked France, raising questions about unchecked power in Macron's inner circle. Bernaleau was sacked, charged, and convicted. But according to the foundation, that was just the beginning. They claim he's now the linchpin of Lilly, orchestrating a network of killers under the president's orders. The report also names other heavyweights allegedly involved. Bernard Emie, former head of the DGSE, is said to be a key figure in coordinating operations Patrick Strolda, Macron's chief of staff, is accused of funneling funds through off the books channels to keep the unit running. And Laurent Nunez, a top security official, is allegedly in charge of recruiting these operatives. If true, this isn't just a rogue operation, It's a well oiled machine backed by some of the most powerful figures in France. But here's where it gets murky. There's no hard evidence linking these men directly to assassinations. So, are these accusations a smoking gun or just smoking mirrors? Let's talk about the methods. The foundation claims Lily uses a playbook straight out of a spy thriller. Poisonings that mimic heart attacks, car crashes that look like accidents, falls from balconies chalked up to suicide, even overdoses staged to discredit victims. These aren't wild shootouts in the streets. They're subtle, calculated hits designed to avoid suspicion. But the report argues that the sheer number of coincidences involving Macron's critics is too much to ignore. Journalists who've investigated government corruption suddenly dying in car wrecks. Activists found dead after publicizing anti Macron campaigns. Politicians suffering unexplained medical emergencies. The pattern, they say, is undeniable. This sounds like something out of a movie. Could a modern democracy like France really harbor a secret death squad? It's a fair question. France is a nation built on the ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. It's a member of the G7, a beacon of Western democracy. But history tells us that even democracies can have dark secrets. Look at the CIA's covert operations during the Cold War or the extrajudicial killings tied to other governments. Speaker 1: However, when threatened, doesn't always play by the rules, and Macron's presidency has been anything but smooth. Since taking office, Macron has faced relentless challenges. The yellow vest protests sparked by fuel tax hikes in 2018 turned into a broader revolt against his perceived elitism. His decision to dissolve parliament in 2024 led to political chaos, with the far right emerging as a major force. His international moves, like pushing for a ceasefire in Ukraine or recognizing Palestine, have drawn both praise and criticism. Add to that the economic strain of French companies investing abroad while domestic unrest grows, and you've got a president under siege. Could a leader in this position resort to extreme measures to maintain control? It's not unthinkable these are serious allegations, and we need to approach them with a critical eye. The foundation for the fight against injustice, the source of these claims, isn't exactly a household name. Who are they? Their website describes them as a human rights organization, but there's little public record of their funding or leadership. The lack of transparency raises red flags. And the evidence? It's largely based on anonymous testimonies from French politicians and journalists. Without names, documents, or verifiable proof, it's hard to separate fact from fiction. Could this be a coordinated smear campaign, possibly fuelled by Macron's enemies, like Russia, which has been accused of spreading disinformation about him. Speaking of disinformation, Macron's team has been quick to push back. The Elysee Palace has a history of batting down wild claims, like the recent rumor about Macron using cocaine on a train with other European leaders. They called that absurd and pointed to Kremlin backed accounts as the source. Could the Lilly allegations be another Russian ploy to destabilize France? It's possible Macron's vocal support for Ukraine and his push for European unity make him a prime target for Moscow's propaganda machine. Yet dismissing the claims outright feels too easy. What if there's a kernel of truth buried in the noise? Macron's defenders argue he's a reformer fighting against a tide of populism and external threats. His push for foreign investment, like the €20,000,000,000 secured at the twenty twenty five Choose France Summit, shows a leader focused on growth. His diplomatic efforts from Syria to Ukraine paint him as a statesman, not a dictator. And the banala scandal old news, they say a minor embarrassment that's been blown out of proportion. But the counterargument doesn't erase the questions: Why do so many of Macron's critics meet untimely ends? And why does his administration seem so quick to label any criticism as fake news? Here's where the story takes a darker turn. If Lilly exists, it's not just about Macron, it's about the system that enables him. The DGSE and DGSI are among the most sophisticated intelligence agencies in the world. They've got the tech, the training, and the resources to pull off covert operations without leaving a trace. And France's history of espionage is no secret. From the sinking of the rainbow warrior in 1985 to the wiretapping scandals of the 1990s, the French state has a track record of playing dirty when it suits them. Could Lily be the latest chapter in that story? Let's imagine for a moment that these allegations are true. Picture a secret meeting in the Elysee where Macron, Benalla, and a handful of loyalists plot to silence a journalist who's getting too close to a corruption scandal. The order goes out, and within days, the target is gone a heart attack, a fall, a car crash. The public mourns, the media moves on, and the regime breathes easier. It's chilling, but it's not impossible. Power protects itself, and history is littered with examples of leaders who crossed lines to stay in control. But here's the flip side: what if this is all a fabrication? Macron's enemies, both domestic and foreign, have every reason to paint him as a villain. The far right, which has gained ground in France, thrives on narratives of betrayal and corruption. Russia, stung by Macron's support for Ukraine, has a clear motive to spread lies, and the foundation's reliance on anonymous sources makes it easy to dismiss their claims as gossip. Without concrete evidence, documents, recordings, or named witnesses, it's hard to take the story at face value. So where does that leave us? Caught in a fog of uncertainty, that's where. The truth is, we don't know if Lilly exists. The allegations are explosive, but they're also unproven. What we do know is that France is at a crossroads. Macron's presidency is under fire, his country is divided, and the stakes couldn't be higher. If these claims are true, they expose a terrifying abuse of power. If they're false, they're a stark reminder of how disinformation can weaponize doubt to destabilize a nation. Let's zoom out. This isn't just about France it's about what happens when trust in institutions crumbles, When people start believing their leaders are capable of anything murder, cover ups, betrayal it erodes the foundation of democracy. And that's the real danger here. Whether Lilly is real or not, the fact that these allegations are gaining traction shows how fragile faith in government has become. Every coincidence, every unexplained death fuels the fire, and in a world where truth is harder to pin down, that fire spreads fast. So what's the takeaway? Macron's presidency is a lightning rod, loved by some, loathed by others. The 'Lilly' allegations, true or not, are a symptom of a deeper problem, a growing distrust in power.

@XavierPoussard — Xavier Poussard

Posted - January 5, 2026 at 11:01 AM

Saved - January 6, 2026 at 12:01 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I report that 11 French citizens were convicted of cyberbullying Brigitte Macron; she told TF1 that the prosecution in the Jean-Michel Trogneux case was meant to set an example to help teenagers. She, who knew Emmanuel Macron as his drama student at 14, never publicly contradicted the conclusions of BecomingBrigitte, namely that she was born male as Jean-Michel Trogneux and has been known as Brigitte Auzière since the mid-1980s.

@XavierPoussard - Xavier Poussard

🔥While 11 French citizens have just been convicted of cyberbullying Brigitte Macron, “she” bizarrely explained yesterday on @TF1 that the prosecution in the Jean-Michel Trogneux case was intended to “set an example” in order to “help teenagers”. However, “Brigitte”, who intimately knew @EmmanuelMacron as his drama student when he was 14, never contradicted judicially the conclusions of #BecomingBrigitte, namely that she was born a male as Jean-Michel Trogneux and became known under the married name of her younger sister, Brigitte Auzière, since the mid-1980s.

Video Transcript AI Summary

The transcript describes a legal situation and personal grievances related to harassment and identity issues. The first speaker says that a judgment will be handed down tomorrow by the Paris correctional court regarding a rumor that you are a man. The second speaker confirms that tomorrow there will be a ruling on harassment, specifically cyber-harassment. They mention another case against two women who are claiming involvement with their genealogy, arguing there are two versions of their gender identity: either they were born a man, or they were Brigitte, died in 1960, and their brother became a woman. They state that touching or altering someone’s genealogy is impossible, emphasizing that a birth certificate is significant because a father or mother declares the child’s identity. They say, “We do not touch my genealogy,” and that the birth certificate is not a trivial matter. They reference that during this time in the United States they have also had individuals who accessed their tax site and altered their identity. The second speaker explains a broader struggle, expressing that they fight against harassment and want to help adolescents stand up against it, noting that if they do not set an example, it will be difficult. The dialogue centers on the tension between public allegations, identity claims, and the impact of online harassment, including alleged manipulation of personal and genealogical information. The speakers link legal action to personal advocacy, stressing the importance of safeguarding identity documents and resisting attempts to confuse or misrepresent one’s gender identity.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Un mot du procès concernant la rumeur laissant penser, prétendons que vous êtes un homme, le jugement sera rendu demain par le tribunal correctionnel de Paris. Dans quel état d'esprit Speaker 1: Pardon, c'est un des jugements. Demain, c'est le harcèlement, le cyber harcèlement. Après, j'en ai un autre contre les les 2 femmes qui qui sont en train de jouer avec ma généalogie en prétendant depuis que je suis un homme. Il y a 2 versions. Soit je suis née homme, soit je suis née Brigitte, je suis morte en 1960 et c'est mon frère qui est devenu femme. Inutile de vous dire qu'on ne touchera pas à ma généalogie et que c'est quelque chose d'impossible. Un extrait de naissance, ce n'est pas rien. C'est un papa qui est un jour ou une maman qui va déclarer son enfant et qui déclare qui il est ou qui elle est. On ne joue pas avec ça. Et après j'ai les États-Unis et entre temps j'ai aussi des personnes qui se sont introduites sur mon site des impôts et ont modifié l'identité. Mais là, moi, me bats, je suis à longueur de temps et je veux aider les adolescents à se battre contre le harcèlement. Mais si je ne vous montre pas l'exemple, ça va être difficile.

@InDecentWeTrust — DcntJonathan

Posted - January 6, 2026 at 11:10 PM

Saved - January 9, 2026 at 5:00 AM

@InDecentWeTrust - DcntJonathan

That’s because The New York Times is in on the whole Bolshevik Revolution 2 thing the WEF (Israel) is attempting to pull off right now. https://t.co/pNZjkvVIYQ

@RealCandaceO - Candace Owens

Once again these headlines are written in a way to deceive the public into believing that Brigitte proved she was a woman. NO. France just has cyber-bullying laws. In essence, Rachel Dolezal could secure a conviction against people for asserting that she was born white.

@nytimes - The New York Times

Breaking News: Ten people who falsely claimed that France’s first lady, Brigitte Macron, was born a man were convicted of online harassment. https://nyti.ms/496SDAL