READY, FIRE, AIM: The People We Can’t Talk About

Photo: Serving suggestion only, not intended to portray anyone in particular.

I’m reading that another late night TV host has been fired or otherwise had his show ‘suspended indefinitely’ after a certain government official threatened to revoke the broadcasting company’s license.  The transgression?  The TV host said something about someone, and used that person’s name.

Please note, I am not mentioning the TV host’s name, or the name of the broadcasting company, or the name of the government official.

Certain news outlets (which will not be named) have published more complete and detailed stories about what happened, but those news stories are not in any way endorsed by me.

These days, it’s not a good idea to mention names in America, or express your opinion.

Fact is, I’m taking a big risk even writing about this stuff, and I want to be perfectly clear that even though I’m mentioning opinions, I am not myself expressing an opinion, about America, or about what’s going on these days.

But I think it’s okay to mention Brigitte Macron, because she’s French.  We can still talk about French people, by name, for the time being.

According to reports (coming from some of the same news outlets that mentioned the certain names I avoided repeating above) Brigitte Macron — the wife of French President Emmanuel Macron — is preparing to submit scientific evidence proving that she is a woman.

This submission of scientific evidence will reportedly form part of a defamation case against right-wing influencer Candace Owens.  (The promised evidence was referred to as “scientific” evidence, in “quotes”, by at least one news outlet which will remain unidentified.)

France’s First Couple is suing Owens after she repeatedly pushed claims that Brigitte Macron was born a man.

I think it’s okay to mention the name of Candace Owens, because she was named by a French lawyer, speaking to the BBC. So I’m merely mentioning a naming event that happened in a foreign country.

Reportedly, the “expert testimony” to be given at the trial “will be scientific in nature”.  Not sure if the experts will be named or anonymous.

Back in 2021, speculation emerged in France that Brigitte Macron was born a man — specifically, a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux. Those claims were repeated by Ms. Owens in a podcast series, prompting the Macrons to file a defamation lawsuit, accusing her of a “campaign of global humiliation.” (JUst to be clear, I am referring to Candace Owens as “Ms. Owens” without any evidence that Ms. Owens is a woman. But this is not meant to be taken as an opinion.)

The case has inserted claims of digital misinformation into an international legal forum in which the right to free speech will presumably be debated, in a U.S. courtroom.

I understand that the “evidence” will include images of Brigitte Macron pregnant and raising her children, and will be presented in open court.

I will admit that I had questions about whether my wife (now my ex-wife) was actually a woman, until I assisted with the birth of our first child. (I’ve mentioned her name in previous columns, but will be avoiding that practice from now on.)

Witnessing a person give birth to a baby is not exactly “scientific” proof that the person is a woman, but it’s pretty darn convincing.

Of course, this whole thing has implications about “freedom of speech” as guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution.  Am I specifically allowed on a podcast to claim, repeatedly, that a French President’s wife is actually a man formerly named Jean-Michel Trogneux, even if I know better?

What if I simply say, “A certain President’s wife was formerly a man with a certain name that won’t be mentioned”?

Is that kind of speech protected by the Constitution?

I mean, after all, this is America.

We’re not in France, for heaven’s sake.