CANDACE OWENS SHOULD EMAIL THE MACRONS LAWYER A LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES SHE WOULD LIKE TO SEE PROVING J M TROGNEUX IS A SEPARATE PERSON AS PART OF DISCOVERY INCLUDING THE DOCS RELATED TO TWO ELECTORAL CARDS
SHE CAN ASK JM TROGNEUX TO TESTIFY IN PERSON
WHY IS HE NOT TESTIFYING AS PART OF THE MACRONS LAWSUIT?
WHY ARE NONE OF THE OFFICIAL DOCS HE MUST HAVE (ELECTRICITY BILLS, CAR DRIVERS LICENSE, MORTGAGE CONTRACT, RENTAL CONTRACT ETC, PENSION, BANK ACCOUNTS) INCLUDED?
WHY ARE TWO ELECTORAL CARDS THE MAIN PIECES OF EVIDENCE?
WHAT IF THEY ARE FORGED?
ONLY IF THEY SEND ALL THE DOCS, WITNESSES, AND THESE ARE VERIFIED, CAN ERROR BE SHOWN
ONLY IF CANDACE OWENS REFUSES ON RECEIPT AND VERIFICATION OF ALL DOCS WHICH CAN REASONABLY BE SAID TO CONSTITUTE PROOF OF IDENTIFY AND EXISTENCE THAT JM TROGNEUX IS A SEPARATE PERSON CAN SHE BE ACCUSED OF MALICE
IF THE MACRONS CAN FULFIL THE LEGAL BAR FOR PROVING JM TROGNEUX IS A SEPARATE PERSON THEN IT FOLLOWS HIS ELECTORAL CARD IS A FRAUD OR BRIGITTE S IS A FRAUD
FAKING ELECTORAL CARDS AND DOUBLE VOTING ARE CRIMINAL OFFENSES IN FRANCE
TO USE A FAKE ELECTORAL CARD IN A LAWSUIT IS TO MISLEAD THE COURT AS PART OF A MALICIOUS AND DEFAMATORY LAWSUIT DESIGNED TO CHILL FREE SPEECH
THE FACT MACRON POSED TOPLESS FOR A GAYS MAG IN 2017 SHOWS HE IS PROUD TO BE A GAY ICON, MAKING CLAIMS HE IS OFFENDED BY THE NOTION BRIGITTE IS A MAN SUSPECT
MACRON MAY BE FORCED TO RESIGN AS PREZ
MACRON S LAWSUIT COULD BACKFIRE SPECTCULARLY ON THEM IF THEY CANNOT SUPPLY ALL THE DOCS, WITNESSES, PROOFS DURING DISCOVERY WHICH ANY US COURT CAN REASONABLY DEMAND AS PROOF JM TROGNEUX HAS LIVED A SEPARATE EXISTENCE FOR DECADES SUCH AS UTILITY BILLS, SALARY SLIPS, SOCIAL SECURITY AND VITALE NUMBERS ETC
Candace Owens may be able to prove that President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron have engaged in voter fraud, file criminal charges against them and perhaps even force Macron to resign because of a glaring flaw in their defamation lawsuit against her.
One of the only two pieces of evidence that the Macrons included in their defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens to show Bigitte Macron s brother is separate from her and has lived a separate life, are two electoral voting cards.
But if the brother cannot now be proven in a court of law on discovery to exist, then it follows the voter card of one or the other of them presented by the Macrons is a fake.
Faking the existence of a non existent person to obtain an electoral card and vote are criminal offenses in France.
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/texte_lc/LEGITEXT000006070239
Brigitte can be accused of double voting which carries with it a 6 month prison sentence and 15 ooo euros fine.
"Le code électoral prévoit une peine de six mois à deux ans de prison et 15.000 euros d’amende en cas de double-vote, ndlr."
Candace Owen can ask for all the electoral list of the voting district as well as official documents which JM Trogneux used to obtain an electoral card as part of discovery.
If it turns out, there were no or not enough docs or grounds for giving JM Trogneux an electoral card or there false grounds, then the Macros could face prison.
Candace Owens can file the criminal lawsuit in France against them and publicize it.
For the president and his wife to be caught faking elecion cards to win a defamation lawsuit may spell the end of Macron s political career.
The Macrons are being advised by top lawyers who would surely have advised them that they could end so called conspiracy theories by presenting Jean Michel Trogneux as a witness in person to the court as well as official records of Jean Michel Trogneux s life such as his electricity bills, car driver license, social security number, pension and so and on.
There are reasonable standards of evidence. They should be easy to obtain.
The fact the Macrons have never done anything of the find will fuel speculation that he did change identity.
Even if the Macrons do present all this evidence and JM Trogneux in person during the trial, and it is verified as genuine and not a fake, they will only prove error and not malice by Candace Owens who can reasonably ask why these facts have been withheld.
To show malice, the Macrons allege Owens spread false and defamatory claims regarding Brigitte Macron’s identity and personal history, despite having received sufficient facts and proofs of his identity
A mere formal retraction requests is not enough to show malice if the request does not contain essential required proofs, documents and witnesses, and just make unfounded claims and demands.
An Appeals Court in Paris ruled that two women who made the same claim were not guilty of defamation and acted in good faith because the Macrons could not, it seems, provide the court with sufficient proof that the brother does exist despite it being so easy for him to go in person to testify with all his documents.
Furthermore, after Macron himself went out of his way to portray himself in the media as a gay icon and posed topless in a gay bi monthly magazine, Garcon, in 2017, the Macrons cannot claim they are offended by rumours they are gay and or men.
The real aim of the lawsuit seems to be to silence the independent media.
That may be why fake controlled media Alex Jones, Dr Drew and Robert Barnes have adopted the same line as the Macrons in the lawsuit of leaving out all the facts which Candace Owens lays out detail and providing no additional facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment