Naomi

I am in the absolute best mood over this Macron dismissal. Feels like a year and a half of my family having to deal with psychotic lies regarding pending bankruptcies, secret accounts and plans to flee the country, has finally come to end. For those of you wondering what happens now with the case, here is a synopsis: You will note the Macrons additionally named two other business entities in their lawsuit: Candace Owens LLC and GeorgeTom Inc. They admitted in our hearing that they were unsure if one or both of these entities housed the podcast and that they would need limited discovery to determine how those businesses run and who runs them. As it turns out, one of the above mentioned entities has absolutely nothing to do with the podcast in any way, shape, or form, so it will be a legal exercise in futility for the couple. In effect, that leaves just one entity. In addition to my personal dismissal, the court also decided in favor of our argument that France’s defamation law should apply. Let me explain to you why that decision deeply impacts matters and was a major point of legal contention; France’s defamation law has a statute of limitation of just 3 months. This means defamation claims time out very quickly. We argued the Macron couple was intentionally forum shopping because being held to France’s 3 months would have naturally expired their claims. We included a briefing from a French legal expert explaining French defamation law. The Macrons did not submit a briefing to counter our arguments, but during oral arguments they suggested that France has a unique statutory law that could, in theory, extend claims up to one year IF the defamation claim pertains to an individual’s sexual orientation or gender. Before ruling on the dismissal pertaining to the remaining entities, the judge is allowing for the Macron couple to submit a supplemental brief, arguing why they believe this case could meet that threshold In his response (see below), the Judge has duly noted our legal expert’s notation that in parallel cases filed by the Presidential couple against other journalists in France, the couple sued under France’s 3 month defamation rule—not the one year statutory. I believe it is worth again noting that the couple is NOT and has never sued anyone for matters pertaining to sex, sexual orientation, or gender (despite intentional media misrepresentations), but rather for defamation related to claims regarding MK Ultra and theft. You are free to read their initial filing against me yourself. So what happens now is the remaining entities and the Macrons submit additional briefings regarding French law and statutes. The judge will then rule on the lingering dismissals.

Or… and hear me out because this theory is even crazier… OR the person who makes my thumbnails and graphics speaks multiple languages and simply made a mistake. And since he doesn’t work for a narcissist and he rarely, if ever, makes mistakes he knows it’s no biggie. I typo all the time X. We have a small team. Get over yourselves and thank you for the never ending free-marketing. (Watch the vid— it’s a good one!)

I’m going to deport her as soon as I get home. I told nanny #5 several times she has to chill with the español. Now look what she’s done. 😩 youtu.be/BXkFQjO6k7Q?is=ss3t…

🚨BREAKING NEWS: I was just personally dismissed from the Macron lawsuit filed against me in Delaware. This case represents one of the grossest, legal overreaches by a foreign government leader in human history—a sitting President’s attempt to personally bankrupt a single podcaster from outside the nation in which he governs. And to formally reiterate since many reporters willfully lied about this most important detail: I was NEVER being sued for stating that Brigitte Macron was born a male. I was instead being sued for discussing MK Ultra and for allegedly accusing the “First Lady” of theft from her sister. I am tremendously grateful to the Delaware courts and to the presiding Judge for looking at this case objectively, despite false media depictions and government pressures.