Mitch Snow Confirmed at Ft Huachuca on Sept 9

[ZNP]

January 2026
Brigitte Macron won her defamation case in France. Can she repeat in the US?

Candace Owens Disputes Delaware Ties in Macron Defamation Case​

July 27, 2026,
The case is Macron v. Owens, Del. Super. Ct., No. N25C-07-194, hearing 7/27/26.


Docket Report Results *not an official site*



State of Delaware
What happens now when judge hasn't made a decision and it is september 7

As of September 7, 2026, the judge has not publicly entered a ruling on Candace Owens’s motion to dismiss. The Delaware docket still says “Decision is reserved.”
State of Delaware

That means:

The judge is still considering the written briefs and arguments.
The lawsuit remains active; it has not been dismissed and has not yet gone to trial.
The judge could dismiss some or all claims, deny the motion, or allow part of the case to proceed while dismissing other claims.
If the motion is denied, the case will generally move into discovery and other pretrial proceedings.
If it is granted, the judge’s order should explain whether the case ends or whether the Macrons can amend their complaint or continue against particular defendants.
A delayed ruling does not automatically mean either side has won. Courts can take weeks or months, particularly when the motion involves jurisdiction, choice of law, and statute-of-limitations issues.
The next meaningful development should be a written order from Judge Sheldon K. Rennie—or a new scheduling order or filing by the parties. The docket currently identifies the matter as a jury-trial case but does not show a trial date.

State of Delaware

So then it is still too soon to say she is a purveyor of slander. Got it, thanks for clarifying that.

 

[Bible_Locket]

So then it is still too soon to say she is a purveyor of slander. Got it, thanks for clarifying that.

The suit regards defamation, dear.

The court case and facts in evidence regarding the Assassin Tyler Robinson shows she's a slanderer and defames Erika and TPUSA,in favor of her intent to defend Tyler Robinson.

Furthermore,one does not need to have a court adjudicate ones guilt for slander and defamation,when the facts of her own broadcasts prove her ill intent. As does her history.

Has Candace Owens been caught spreading misinformation or retracted statements before?
(*Oh,yes)

https://factually.co/?q=Has%20Candace%20Owens%20been%20caught%20spreading%20misinformation%20or%20retracted%20statements%20before%3F

 

[ZNP]

The suit regards defamation, dear.

The court case and facts in evidence regarding the Assassin Tyler Robinson shows she's a slanderer and defames Erika and TPUSA,in favor of her intent to defend Tyler Robinson.

Furthermore,one does not need to have a court adjudicate ones guilt for slander and defamation,when the facts of her own broadcasts prove her ill intent. As does her history.

Has Candace Owens been caught spreading misinformation or retracted statements before?
(*Oh,yes)

https://factually.co/?q=Has%20Candace%20Owens%20been%20caught%20spreading%20misinformation%20or%20retracted%20statements%20before%3F

Not if it turns out that the questions she is asking are relevant, dear.

"Defending Tyler Robinson" is not slander, dear. It is the cornerstone of our justice system.

The slander is saying that Tyler Robinson's family turned him in. Actually the father went down with him because he had to turn himself in.

 

[Bible_Locket]

Have Public Officials or Platforms Taken Action Against Candace Owens for Spreading Misinformation?
Researched on August 1, 2026

https://factually.co/fact-checks/politics/actions-against-candace-owens-for-misinformation-598d0d

 

[Bible_Locket]

Not if it turns out that the questions she is asking are relevant, dear.

She fabricates questions and lies as answers.

 

[ZNP]

Not if it turns out that the questions she is asking are relevant, dear.

"Defending Tyler Robinson" is not slander, dear. It is the cornerstone of our justice system.

The slander is saying that Tyler Robinson's family turned him in. Actually the father went down with him because he had to turn himself in.

The picture that is used to identify him at the scene is too vague to be definitive and it was altered.

The only real evidence is someone posted a detailed, blow by blow account of what took place as a very detailed confession and they posted it on his account. Now if the defense can prove he was not the one who posted that then the prosecutions case collapses. It could explain why someone would post such a detailed confession online but then plead not guilty. Time will tell.

 

[Bible_Locket]

In 2021, Candace Owens filed a defamation and tortious interference lawsuit in Delaware against USA Today and Lead Stories LLC.
abcnews4.com
2

The lawsuit stemmed from fact-checks the two organizations published in April 2020 regarding Facebook posts Owens had made about the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically:

Lead Stories had fact-checked a post where Owens claimed the U.S. government was overstating the scope and dangers of the pandemic, labeling it with "Hoax Alert" and "False."
abcnews4.com
1
USA Today had fact-checked a post where she questioned the relationship between COVID-19 and flu death counts in early 2020.
abcnews4.com
1
Owens claimed these articles were published maliciously to harm her and caused Facebook to place warning labels on her posts, which she argued prevented her from earning advertising revenue and hindered the promotion of her book, Blackout.
abcnews4.com
2

The lawsuit was dismissed by a Delaware Superior Court judge. The judge ruled that Owens failed to state an actionable claim, noting that the term "Hoax Alert" was used as "loose, figurative, or hyperbolic language" rather than a factual statement of lie, and that the defendants' speech was protected by the First Amendment.
abcnews4.com
1

Judge tosses suit by Candace Owens over Facebook fact checks

DOVER, Del. (AP) — A Delaware judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by conservative political commentator Candace Owens against USA Today and another news organization over fact-checking coronavirus posts she made on Facebook.

firstamendment.mtsu.edu

 

[Bible_Locket]

In 2021, Candace Owens filed a defamation and tortious interference lawsuit in Delaware against USA Today and Lead Stories LLC.
abcnews4.com
2

The lawsuit stemmed from fact-checks the two organizations published in April 2020 regarding Facebook posts Owens had made about the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically:

Lead Stories had fact-checked a post where Owens claimed the U.S. government was overstating the scope and dangers of the pandemic, labeling it with "Hoax Alert" and "False."
abcnews4.com
1
USA Today had fact-checked a post where she questioned the relationship between COVID-19 and flu death counts in early 2020.
abcnews4.com
1
Owens claimed these articles were published maliciously to harm her and caused Facebook to place warning labels on her posts, which she argued prevented her from earning advertising revenue and hindered the promotion of her book, Blackout.
abcnews4.com
2

The lawsuit was dismissed by a Delaware Superior Court judge. The judge ruled that Owens failed to state an actionable claim, noting that the term "Hoax Alert" was used as "loose, figurative, or hyperbolic language" rather than a factual statement of lie, and that the defendants' speech was protected by the First Amendment.
abcnews4.com
1

Judge tosses suit by Candace Owens over Facebook fact checks

DOVER, Del. (AP) — A Delaware judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by conservative political commentator Candace Owens against USA Today and another news organization over fact-checking coronavirus posts she made on Facebook.

firstamendment.mtsu.edu

 

[ZNP]

She fabricates questions and lies as answers.

So then sue her.

If I was a juror I would want to see the following:

1. I want to see a person of similar stature put that gun down a pant leg and in his book bag and go and climb up on the roof.

2. I then want to see this person reassemble the rifle and see how long that takes.

3. I then want to see them take one shot with a scope that hasn't been trued, and see how accurate that is.

4. I then want to see them on the roof dissassemble the rifle and see how long that takes.

5. I want to have camera angles from where the crowd was while he is on the roof assembling, shooting and dissassembling the rifle as well, so I can see if that seems plausible to me.

6. I also want a sharpshooter to take one shot with a similar rifle and same caliber of bullet, hit the neck bone of a ballistic surrogate and see how big the wound is.

It seems to me this reenactment should be part of the trial.

 

[Bible_Locket]

The picture that is used to identify him at the scene is too vague to be definitive and it was altered.

The only real evidence is someone posted a detailed, blow by blow account of what took place as a very detailed confession and they posted it on his account. Now if the defense can prove he was not the one who posted that then the prosecutions case collapses. It could explain why someone would post such a detailed confession online but then plead not guilty. Time will tell.

The only real evidence..

Is proof word for word as you post ,that you never bother to watch the preliminary hearing.

You feed off of Owens lies. And ignore facts in evidence. What is that?Look it up. Oh,but you won't.

Because your agenda is to insist,Tyler didn't do it.

When a preliminary hearing decision proves there is enough evidence to alledge he did!

Please,continue to defend evil. And berate righteousness.

It serves to warn everyone here.

 

[ZNP]

So then sue her.

If I was a juror I would want to see the following:

1. I want to see a person of similar stature put that gun down a pant leg and in his book bag and go and climb up on the roof.

2. I then want to see this person reassemble the rifle and see how long that takes.

3. I then want to see them take one shot with a scope that hasn't been trued, and see how accurate that is.

4. I then want to see them on the roof dissassemble the rifle and see how long that takes.

5. I want to have camera angles from where the crowd was while he is on the roof assembling, shooting and dissassembling the rifle as well, so I can see if that seems plausible to me.

6. I also want a sharpshooter to take one shot with a similar rifle and same caliber of bullet, hit the neck bone of a ballistic surrogate and see how big the wound is.

It seems to me this reenactment should be part of the trial.

My concern is for Erika and her children. I don't expect people in the crowd to see the guy on the roof with a gun, but if it turns out that it should have been seen by security, well then Erika should be able to sue them for negligence. I've heard estimates that it can take 5 minutes to assemble and another 5 minutes to dissassemble the rifle. Charlie Kirk was shot about 20 minutes into his speech and you would think this guy had to have climbed up before it all started, so they had 25 minutes to scan the rooftops during the speech, especially in the five minutes after he was shot.

This isn't going to return Charlie, but whoever was in charge of security needs to be held accountable if they are culpable.

 

[Bible_Locket]

Thank you to that one that sent me this.

ZNP AI

Google Search

I agree. It " 'splains much!"