BRI-SP: Other noteworthy facts
Part 10: There is so much more to this affair, so here is a collection of anecdotes and issues that are part of the research
The biggest question obviously is: what has happened to the real Brigitte Trogneux? Where is she? Is she still alive?
Xavier Poussard suggests the possibility that she might have had a terminal illness and before passing, let her transsexual brother take over her identity. As we have no clue whatsoever, every speculation is a possibility.
It is clear that the reveal of what happened to Brigitte Trogneux will be the most conclusive proof, and it is the central question that has to be answered at present.
On July 15, 2025, Anne-Marie (Annie) Trogneux was buried. The eldest of the Trogneux siblings died at 93 years old, which did not prevent the French MSM, as always loyal serfs of the Elysée, to make a big drama of this “terrible loss”. The way they tried to portray Brigitte Macron as this deeply saddened victim of a horrible event is simply farcical and actually over the top.
But way more importantly is that of course and as always, Jean-Michel Trogneux was nowhere to be seen.
Equally, this fact is totally ignored in the MSM, who do confirm that he and Monique are together with Brigitte now the only surviving Trogneux siblings. The fact that he’s claimed to be Brigitte Macron and never anywhere to be found is simply swept under the rug.
If Brigitte Macron was serious about suffering from the “rumours” and wants it all to stop, this funeral would have been the perfect occasion to have the photographers (who were present and took pictures of the Macrons) take a picture of her with Jean-Michel and Monique, and thus prove that she is actually not her brother. But of course that never happened.
There is quite something to say about the signatures of Brigitte Macron, Brigitte Auzière and Jean-Michel Trogneux. I’ve decided not to discuss it in this overview, because I feel there’s still more that needs to be found in this regard, but it is one of the leads that Brigittologists are following: the few pieces of handwriting we have of the Trogneux siblings seems to indicate that Brigitte Macron’s handwriting is not that of Brigitte Trogneux.
It is claimed that the school picture of Jean-Michel Trogneux in 2nd grade (school year 1952-53), proves that he had a gap between his two upper incisors, which is seen again in a later picture of Brigitte Macron as a teacher. There is even a little article in a gossip magazine that shows the difference and claims Brigitte Macron had this gap removed with dental care.
However, the family picture shows a smiling Jean-Michel Trogneux with perfect teeth. Hence the conclusion that it had to be another touch-up of this picture, in order to remove the dental gap that would give away that Brigitte Macron is Jean-Michel Trogneux.
Obviously, I have not seen any hardcopies of the pictures, all I have is the internet. But it seems rather clear to me that we have only these two pictures of Jean-Michel Trogneux where we see his teeth. And 2nd grade is exactly the age that teeth change. From what I can see, the school picture shows a boy with a missing tooth, not with a gap between the incisors. And we seem to have only that one picture of him at 12 years old in which we can see his teeth again.
But most of all: the many pictures of Brigitte as a teacher do not show a before/after chronology where she first had a gap, and then none anymore. The first pictures of her teaching at Lucie Berger show a very normal smile, and only in a few pictures of La Providence is there some tooth issue visible.
The conclusions drawn here seem to me not at all warranted, unless someone can give a clear timeline of many pictures showing a consistency. Right now, the opposite is the case: the pictures are totally inconsistent and show an almost reverse chronology. (See Part 6 for pictures of Brigitte as a teacher, with the tooth issue most clearly visible on the androgynous picture.)
Brigitte Macron claims to have been living, alone, in the US at the time of the first (fake) Apollo moonlanding. Brigitte Trogneux was then just 16 years old. Jean-Michel Trogneux was then 24 years old. Having Brigitte Trogneux, at 16, living alone in the US is not credible and doesn’t fit into the whole official narrative. This memory makes sense only if Brigitte Macron is Jean-Michel Trogneux.
She also claims to have worn a school uniform for 15 years, from kindergarten until high school graduation. Jean-Michel Trogneux might have done so. But by the time Brigitte Trogneux, who is 8 years younger, went to high school, the uniform had been abandoned.
Another clash of memories can be found in comparing two different interviews: one from Maëlle Brun’s book Brigitte Macron L’affranchie, in which she mentions that Brigitte Trogneux received a Piaggio Ciao moped for obtaining her school certificate in 1969, at age 16.
But in a TV interview, when asked if she ever ‘climbed’ a Harley Davidson, she said “Yes, but I wasn’t allowed to tell daddy. Our parents considered two-wheelers too dangerous. So we rode them, but kept it from them.”
It is extremely likely that Jean-Michel Trogneux, 8 years older than Brigitte Trogneux, and with a much older brother and brothers-in-law, would have been given the opportunity to drive their motorbikes, as long as it was kept secret. But for Brigitte Trogneux, growing up in a different time and having received a moped at 16, such a memory is completely out of place.
All the Trogneux children married very young, except for Jean-Michel.
The four girls married at 22 or younger, and Jean-Claude marries at 26. As already mentioned, all three older girls marry into wealthy business families, Rotary Club friends of their father’s. Brigitte marries into what seems to be a related family of secret agents and colonials.
Jean-Michel marries at 35, with someone who, as far as we know, is not related to the Trogneux family at all (Véronique Dreux), and divorces her 7 years later.
Even here, he’s clearly the odd one out.
At the beginning of his research, Xavier Poussard erroneously copied an entry from google books as "Jean-Michel, Henri Trogneux acquired the Gallice jewellery store located at 25, rue des Boucheries in Toulon (Var), address that served as his domicile".
He published this information in the first issue of Faits & Documents that dealt with Brigitte Macron, but discovers a few months later that he had clubbed two entries of google books together, due to the way the search results were displayed. In reality, the entry refers to Jean-Michel Trogneux as the manager of a newly registered company, Picardie Métal, in Trogny-Blanville, and the details concerning the jewellery store in Toulon pertain to a totally different and unrelated person.
Toulon is in the Provence, in the south-east of France, 800 kilometres from Amiens, while Trogny-Blanville is a village just next to Amiens, not even 10 kilometres away. Clearly a huge difference.
However, instead of using this absurdity in their processes against Natacha Rey and Amandine Roy, or to publicly debunk the research into Brigitte Macron’s past, the false information was confirmed to Xavier by the person who had shared a flat with Jean-Jacques Trogneux, when he called back to tell Xavier that Jean-Jacques’s father had nothing mysterious and was “un petit gros” (see “Jean-Jacques Trogneux” in part 4). This obviously is absurd: the fact that the people who are spoken to are repeating false information proves that they are not interested in setting straight a “fake news”, but are desperately trying to put the Brigittologists off-track.
It is also noteworthy that Picardie Métal, the company that was registered 1973 with Jean-Michel Trogneux as its manager, was a sham company, probably set up to siphon off money in a deal about tennis courts renovations between father Jean Trogneux and a business friend. After a few years, the liquidation of the company started and it was officially closed by court order in 1982.
On May 30th, 2025, Marlène Schiappa, former minister in Emmanuel Macron’s cabinet, declares on national television the “sordid” way in which Brigitte Macron is pushed to talk about her deceased brother in order to prove that she did not usurp his identity. It’s a completely insane attempt to defend Brigitte Macron, where everything is mixed up: who is now dead? And whose identity is supposed to be stolen? It’s clear that this simpleton is either not able to get the official story clear, or that she is part of some scheme to confuse everybody even more.
While researching for her book in 2023, Emmanuelle Anizon interviews Anne-Marie Bouchez, a former classmate of Brigitte Trogneux. The interviewee talks about her wedding in 1976, and provides a picture of it, including Brigitte Trogneux, who was her witness. The picture shows Brigitte in the foreground on the right, fully in profile, with the bride and groom a bit further away, filling the centre and left space.
Xavier Poussard confirms that we can clearly recognise the Brigitte from the marriage picture, but I myself in fact immediately recognised Brigitte Macron. It’s rather hard to see, but the profile looks to me like the one of the transsexual “Véronique”. This wedding was in 1976, 15 months before the TV interview with “Véronique” aired. If Brigitte Macron is indeed this “Véronique”, she would already be going around as a woman.
However, the Face++ comparison gives a low result for Brigitte Macron, and a very high result for the bride in the marriage picture. At the same time, the picture seems to show a still really young woman: Brigitte Trogneux is then 23, while Jean-Michel Trogneux at that moment is already 31. All this seems to prove this is indeed Brigitte Trogneux.
But to make things more confusing once again, Anne-Marie Bouchez tells Emmanuel Anizon that Brigitte Trogneux was not yet married at that time, while in fact, she had married André Auzière in 1974 and already had her first child! Jean-Michel Trogneux, on the other hand, would not marry until 1980, in secret, and without any pictures that we know of.
On February 26, 2020, a reception took place at the Elysée palace, where different interest persons and groups were invited to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child. Invited was also Pascale Morinière, then president of the Associations des Familles Catholiques (AFC: Associations of Catholic Families). She confronted Macron with the shocking fact that just a few days earlier, the law on “PMA” (procreation médicalement assistée, artificial insemination) had been altered to exclude the need of a man. Formerly, only heterosexual couples had been legally allowed to have PMA treatment, now all women were accepted, single or with a female partner. This left kids without a father. In discussing this with Emmanuel Macron, he left her aghast by proclaiming that fathers can be symbolic, and, noticing her shock, added “Your problem is that you believe that a father is necessarily a male.”
In a short TV street interview with Brigitte Macron about the start of Emmanuel’s first presidency, she answered to criticism against Macron with “Personne n’est parfait. Nobody is perfect. It’s one of my best films, Some Like It Hot, I recommend you watch it.”
In effect, “Nobody’s perfect” are the last words of the comedy from 1959, which deals with homosexuality and transvestites, mostly for the comedic effect. The words finish the final movie dialogue, between a man and his love interest, as the man is set on marrying the fake woman. The transvestite tries to wiggle out of it without revealing he’s been fooling the man all this time, but nothing works. When he reveals he’s not a woman but a man, the closing reply is “Well, nobody’s perfect!”
Brigitte Trogneux was 7 years old in 1959, Jean-Michel Trogneux 15.
At the beginning of 2023, Roselyne Bachelot publishes a book, 682 jours, in which she tells stories from the 682 days she worked as a minister in Emmanuel Macron’s cabinet. She makes a little remark that doesn’t go unnoticed and has social media buzzing: after the fire of the Notre Dame, which collapsed the roof and fully destroyed the spire, several projects for the reconstruction of the roof and spire are being looked at. Roselyne, in a very passing way, mentions that the Elysée wanted it to be an architectural statement, and that Brigitte Macron proposed to rebuild the Notre Dame spire as “some sort of an erected phallus with golden balls around its base”.
Obviously, the loyal press (the only reason Macron was ever elected) fell all over themselves in their haste to ‘debunk’ this ‘bad joke’ or ‘exaggerated claim’.
It is remarkable and noteworthy that the divorce from André Auzière was officialised in 2006 only. Brigitte Auzière had started an affair with Emmanuel Macron in 1992, and André Auzière, who had already been more or less invisible or inexistent up until then, is said to have left the marriage in 1994.
One can only speculate what a man goes through when he discovers his wife has a relationship with a 14-year old. Would that not be a reason to divorce her immediately, instead of becoming a sort of paper figure who will be dealt with whenever convenient and needed?
Brigitte Macron constantly claims that nobody needs to know anything about the private life of the Macrons, and that therefore, there is the ‘omertà’ in place, and no friends or relatives are allowed to give interviews.
However, nobody ever asked her to be part of anything. It was the Macron presidential campaign that put Brigitte in the spotlights and made the whole election about a couple instead of one person. It was their own decision to get Emmanuel elected with the help of the Trogneux family’s story, as Emmanuel was not relatable and seen as just a weirdo, not living in the same world as the people who were supposed to elect him.
This dichotomy is inexplicable in the official narrative, but completely natural if Brigitte Macron is Jean-Michel Trogneux.
I have not included any of it here, but quite a part of the research pertains to Emmanuel Macron’s past. The same complete weirdness is repeated there, with different places of birth and loads of pedophilia suggestions.
Pedophilia seems to be the common thread tying the lives of both the Macrons together. In his book, Xavier Poussard sums up all of the known, convicted perpetrators of pedophilia scandals who are given high positions of power in the Macron cabinets. It’s frightening, appalling and frankly mind-numbing to see how the French people allow that such convicted felons are put back into power positions, as if nothing had happened. It is also not surprising then that there is a big push in the media and legislation to normalise pedophilia.
And lastly, if the Brigittologists are “transphobe” for discussing this topic, how can that be if Brigitte Macron were a CIS woman?
If you read carefully what the French MSM writes about this topic, it is actually they who are transphobe: they find it insane, outrageous and insulting to even suggest that Brigitte Macron would be trans. What does that say about their stance on transgenderism? If they were so inclusive, progressive and tolerant, would it not be great to have a president who was married to a trans woman? Would that not be something to be proud of? In the woke world, which they completely represent, that would be the thing to promote instead of vilify, no?
These accusations of the Brigittologists are nothing but stupid diversions: there is no logic, no rationality in what they claim, and they have certainly not a single argument to counter the research with.
The issue is not that it would be scandalous if Brigitte were transgender, but that she is criminally usurping her sister’s identity, and had a pedophilic relationship with her student. And that both have used the mainstream press to simply lie their heads off.
The issue is not about shaming trans people, but about being told the truth, instead of stupid lies.
One last point that I feel I should make, even though I’m a bit on the fence about talking about it or not. I’ve not seen it openly discussed so far, as it is damaging our case. But I believe in always being truthful, and in not pretending something isn’t there.
I’m talking about the in-fighting between Brigittologists.
It is clear to me that we are dealing with quite big egos here, and obviously, the subject is immense. Revealing a truth that the highest powers in France want to keep hidden, is self-evidently a very big affair.
It is clear by now that especially Natacha Rey and her lawyer are publishing statements that are very negative about Xavier Poussard, which, even if they have a foundation in truth, are absolutely not the way to go if one wants to take on the satanic elite that rules our society. At this moment, early July 2025, I cannot foresee what all is going to happen, but the attacks on Xavier Poussard and the jealousy around the fact that he got Candace Owens’s platform, is the one who published the book, and is not prosecuted but (for the moment) living safely in Milan, seems extremely detrimental. The fact that such stuff is made public is just dumb, and weakens the position: we are heading towards a camp “Natacha” and a camp “Xavier”. It’s absurd and totally undermines the research. It’s as if we’re doing the Elysée’s dirty work for them.
Let’s hope that the truth and the facts will remain the focus of the discussion and that such pettiness can be sorted out in private, if it has to be there at all. Our only focus should be on revealing the truth about the Macrons. Who are these people? What is there in their past that can’t see the light of day?
<Back to the BRI-SP Introduction
