Brigitte macron targeting candace
Executive summary
Candace Owens has publicly alleged that French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron funded a $1.5 million plot to assassinate her after she pursued an online series asserting Brigitte Macron was born male; Owens says she reported the claim to the White House and U.S. counterterrorism agencies but has not produced verifiable evidence for the allegation [1] [2] [3]. The Macrons filed a multi-count defamation suit in Delaware after Owens’ “Becoming Brigitte” series and related accusations, and multiple news outlets note that independent reporting has found no public evidence substantiating Owens’ assassination claims [4] [5] [3].
1. The allegation and how it was made
On Nov. 22–24, 2025, Owens posted on X and spoke on her program that a “high‑ranking employee of the French Government” told her the Macrons had “executed upon and paid” for an assassination, that $1.5 million was involved and that the alleged plot included operatives with French Legion ties; she said she told U.S. federal authorities and the White House, and briefly took her show off the air [2] [1] [6].
2. Legal and reporting context: a defamation fight already underway
The Macrons brought a Delaware defamation lawsuit in July 2025 over Owens’ eight‑part “Becoming Brigitte” series and other claims that Brigitte Macron was assigned male at birth; French authorities also have pursued online harassment cases related to the same rumours [4] [2] [7]. News accounts emphasize that the defendants and targets are already locked in legal and reputational battles, which frames both Owens’ new allegations and the Macrons’ response [4] [5].
3. Evidence and independent verification — what outlets report
Major outlets and fact‑checking desks covering Owens’ claims uniformly note that she has not provided verifiable, independently confirmed evidence to back the assassination allegation; reporting states the claims are unproven as of late November 2025 [3] [5]. Some pieces describe Owens’ source as unnamed and specify that the claim has not been corroborated by public records or by officials cited in her posts [3] [1].
4. How the claim spread and who amplified it
Owens’ X post drew tens of millions of views and was picked up across conservative and mainstream outlets; other commentators pressed her for proof publicly, and some critics called the narrative “crazy” or questioned veracity while her supporters cited the report’s reach as reason to take it seriously [1] [8] [6]. European and U.S. coverage has varied in tone but consistently points out the absence of corroboration [3] [1].
5. Motives, incentives and competing agendas
Owens frames her reporting as investigative journalism and a defense of free speech; the Macrons’ lawsuit frames her work as an orchestrated defamation campaign to damage Brigitte Macron’s reputation [7] [4]. Media outlets and analysts described the wider dispute as tied to culture‑war dynamics and noted that actors on both sides have legal and political incentives — Owens to maintain her audience and narrative, and the Macrons to protect privacy and reputation and to deter further online harassment [7] [4].
6. Broader implications and risks of unverified claims
Journalists and fact‑checkers quoted in reporting warn that unverified allegations of assassination by a sitting head of state raise national‑security and diplomatic stakes if repeated without proof; they also flag the risk of fueling conspiracy networks and harassment campaigns that already spawned trials in Paris over sexist cyber‑harassment related to the Brigitte Macron rumours [3] [4].
7. What reporting does not say
Available reporting does not include publicly disclosed, independently verified documents, witness testimony, financial trails, or official confirmations that substantiate Owens’ assertion of a $1.5 million hit contracted by the Macrons; outlets explicitly state no verifiable evidence has been produced publicly as of late November 2025 [5] [3]. Specifics such as named assassins, banking records, or corroborating statements from U.S. agencies are not present in the cited coverage [1] [6].
8. Bottom line for readers
Owens has made a serious and sensational allegation and says she reported it to U.S. authorities; multiple respected outlets note there is no public, verifiable evidence supporting the claim and the Macrons continue to pursue defamation remedies regarding other related accusations [2] [3] [5]. Readers should treat the assassination allegation as unproven and follow developments in both the defamation case and any official confirmations or disclosures from investigative authorities [4] [1].