What specific statements by Candace Owens were rated false or misleading in 2024 and 2025?
Executive summary
Candace Owens repeated multiple specific claims in 2024–2025 that news organisations, fact‑checkers and plaintiffs described as false or unproven: notably her assertion that France’s first lady Brigitte Macron “is a man,” which prompted a July 2025 defamation lawsuit by Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron and which critics say Owens persisted in despite contrary evidence [1] [2]. In late 2025 Owens escalated into allegations that the Macrons had ordered or paid for an assassination against her — a charge fact‑checkers and multiple outlets reported with “zero proof” [3] [4].
1. The Macron “is a man” allegation — the central falsehood that triggered legal action
Owens repeatedly promoted an online conspiracy that Brigitte Macron was born male, claiming as early as March 2024 that she would stake her “entire professional reputation” on that belief; that campaign culminated in a 219‑page July 2025 defamation complaint from Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron asserting the claims are “demonstrably false” and documenting extensive contrary evidence [1] [2]. News outlets report Owens published an eight‑part series and continued amplifying the narrative after lawyers asked for retractions, which the Macrons cited when filing suit [5] [2].
2. Repetition after courts and fact‑checking — why watchdogs flagged the statements
French courts and local reporting previously treated versions of the false claim as defamation in related cases, and fact‑checking organisations and mainstream outlets described Owens’s ongoing promotion of the theory as unverified or false; PBS and the BBC summarised the Macrons’ case that Owens “disregarded all credible evidence disproving her claim” in favour of platforming conspiracy figures [2] [1]. Multiple international outlets note that Owens continued to broadcast the allegation even after legal warnings [5] [1].
3. The assassination allegation — an escalation widely reported as lacking evidence
In November 2025 Owens publicly alleged that Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron had “executed upon and paid for” her assassination, later posting more detailed claims about payments and operatives; outlets and fact‑checkers characterised those allegations as unsupported and “zero evidence” at the time of reporting [3] [4]. Reports say Owens claimed she had informed U.S. counterterrorism agencies and posted purported sourcing, but independent checks by media found no corroboration [3] [6].
4. Broader pattern: conspiratorial framing around Charlie Kirk’s death and other assertions
Beyond Macron‑related claims, Owens promoted alternative narratives about the death of Charlie Kirk and questioned official accounts — suggesting a “patsy” or broader plot and disputing details such as the role of a named suspect — which mainstream outlets and commentators flagged as speculative and unverified [7] [8]. Coverage shows Owens has pressed these theories in long‑form streams and posts, leading to pushback from other media and public figures [7] [9].
5. Institutional consequences and reputational effects reported in the record
Owens’s repeated controversial statements contributed to tangible consequences: she left The Daily Wire in March 2024 amid backlash over a string of comments described as antisemitic by some observers [10], and the Macrons’ decision to sue is a formal legal consequence tied directly to claims about Brigitte Macron’s gender [1] [5]. International authorities also cited her record when denying entry rights in related coverage of later proceedings [11] [12].
6. Disagreements in coverage and limits of available sources
Sources agree that Owens made the specific Macron gender claim and repeated assassination allegations; they disagree on motive and on how quickly or thoroughly officials investigated. Some opinion pieces and right‑leaning outlets defend Owens’s right to question narratives, but the factual record cited here shows mainstream outlets, fact‑checkers and the Macrons’ complaint treat key claims as false or unproven [2] [5] [3]. Available sources do not mention independent, verifiable evidence corroborating Owens’s assassination claim or the Brigitte Macon gender allegation beyond Owens’s own posts and the conspiracy networks she amplified [3] [4].
7. What to watch next
The Macron defamation suit and the public record of Owens’s posts are ongoing matters: the complaint lays out the Macrons’ assertion that the claims were “demonstrably false,” and international reporting continues to treat Owens’s assassination allegations as unsubstantiated [2] [3]. Readers should treat Owens’s specified statements about Brigitte Macron’s sex and about an assassination ordered by the Macrons as disputed and, per major outlets cited here, without independent verification in current reporting [1] [3].