Friday, August 22, 2025

Who is Jean Marie Trogneux?

 According to Candace Owens latest episode:  BREAKING NEWS! Jean “M” Trogneux FOUND In The United States In The 60’s. | Candace Ep 232 , a certain "Jean Marie Trogneux" was a crew member aboard the French ship MS Michigan on August 27, 1961 and entered the United States in Seattle.  Candace doesn't claim it is the infamous JMT, because he would have only been 16 at the time, so it must be some other relative.  She does go off on a speculative theory about the MS Michigan (the same ship) shipping something from Oakland to Germany in 1971 (10 years later), and Oakland is near Stanford, and the Stanford Prison Experiment happened in 1971, and a side photo of a participant resembles JMT, so maybe he was brainwashed by MkUltra (just like Charles Manson was according to the book "Chaos") to participate in the Stanford Prison Experiment.  

For fun, lets ask the chatterbox what he thinks of this latest theory.

================================================

Hey chatterbox, what do you think of Candace Owens' latest crazy theory? This was posted on Youtube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cctwGCBQdUc and under that is a transcript you could read to understand what she is saying. She basically implies that Jean Michel Trogneux was brainwashed by MkUltra (as explained by the book Chaos by Tom O'Neill) and that he may have participated in the Stanford Prison Experiment. Do you think she is on to something, or do you think it is too speculative to waste time on?

What Candace Owens Is Claiming

In this video, Candace Owens promotes a sweeping conspiracy theory, suggesting that Jean-Michel Trogneux (Brigitte Macron’s brother) was allegedly brainwashed via the CIA’s MK-Ultra program—and implies he may have even taken part in the Stanford Prison Experiment. This is part of a broader theory linking the Macron family to CIA mind-control, identity theft, incest, and even a rigged path to the French presidency.

Notably, Owens repeats widely debunked claims, including that Brigitte Macron was born a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux—which the Macrons have publicly and legally denied.People.comeuronewsThe Guardian

What We Know from Credible Sources

  1. MK-Ultra Reality

    • MK-Ultra was indeed a real CIA mind-control program running from 1953 to 1973. It involved highly unethical experiments, including LSD and other forms of psychological manipulation—without informed consent.WikipediaHISTORY

    • There's absolutely no credible evidence to suggest any connection between the Macrons—or Jean-Michel Trogneux—and MK-Ultra.

  2. Stanford Prison Experiment

    • The SPE was a short-lived, highly controversial psychological study conducted in 1971 at Stanford University. It involved students role-playing as guards and prisoners. The experiment ended prematurely due to severe psychological harm to participants.Wikipedia

    • Again, there is no evidence that Jean-Michel Trogneux ever participated in or is connected to that experiment.

  3. Legal Reality & Defamation

    • Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron have launched a 219-page defamation lawsuit in Delaware, accusing Owens of spreading a “grotesque narrative designed to inflame and degrade.” The lawsuit highlights that Jean-Michel is in fact Brigitte’s brother—not an alternate identity—and that these claims are demonstrably false.People.comFinancial TimeseuronewsThe Guardian

    • Similar defamation proceedings in France resulted in initial convictions against two women pushing these theories—but the appeal acquitted them (though that ruling did not affirm the claims as true). The Macrons are pursuing further legal action in France’s highest court.The GuardianThe Times

So, is there any merit here?

Bottom line: It's wildly speculative, unsupported by any credible evidence, and in fact, directly contradicted by official legal documentation, birth records, and public records.

  • The real MK-Ultra did exist—but that doesn’t mean any specific individuals were involved, especially ones with no evidence whatsoever.

  • The Stanford experiment took place decades ago and was not linked to MK-Ultra or the Macron family.

  • These conspiracy theories are part of a known misinformation campaign, and the Macrons are actively fighting them in court as defamation.

Final Verdict

In my view, this theory is far too speculative to be taken seriously—it appears to be sensationalist storytelling rather than fact-based analysis. If the goal is illumination, not provocation, this falls squarely into the latter.

What drove you to ask about this one—were you curious about how conspiracy theories escalate, or did something specific catch your attention in her claims?

========================

I watched Candace Owens latest video and it is entertaining. Can I ask a couple of follow up questions? What can you find out about a certain "Jean Marie Trogneux" who supposedly was aboard the French cargo ship MS Michigan and entered the United States in Seattle on August 27, 1961?
ChatGPT said:

Short answer: I can’t verify that claim from open, reliable records.

Here’s what I could find right now:

  • Candace’s own episode notes point to a National Archives Catalog item labeled “Michigan crew list” (catalog id 365025754, with an image page she cites), but that link isn’t directly accessible here and I can’t confirm what name(s) appear on that image. Apple PodcastsSpotifyRumble

  • There was a French Line (Compagnie Générale Transatlantique) motor vessel named MS Michigan operating on the Pacific Coast by late 1959, so a Seattle call in 1961 is plausible from a shipping-history standpoint. CONTENTdm+1

  • Public, digitized Seattle passenger/crew lists in the National Archives generally run only through 1957; post-1957 arrivals (like 1961) are typically not online and require a targeted NARA request or access via subscription databases. FamilySearchNational Archives

What this means

  • The assertion that a “Jean-Marie Trogneux” arrived in Seattle on August 27, 1961 aboard MS Michigan might be based on a crew list image someone found in the NARA catalog, but without seeing that page I can’t confirm the name, date, or port. And “crew list” ≠ passenger list—those forms (e.g., INS Form I-418) enumerate the ship’s crew, not travelers.

How to verify definitively (practical steps)

If you want to nail this down with primary records, here’s exactly what to ask for:

  1. National Archives (NARA) reference request

    • Ask for the crew list (INS Form I-418) for the motor vessel Michigan, arrival Port of Seattle, late August 1961 (target Aug 27, 1961).

    • Likely Record Group: RG 85 (INS) or related port records; include the catalog id Candace cites (365025754) to help staff locate the specific image/page. National Archives

  2. Newspaper shipping news

    • Check Seattle papers’ “arrivals and clearances” columns for Aug–Sep 1961 to confirm Michigan’s movements. (These are often in paywalled archives; the Marine Digest confirms the ship’s service on the coast, but not the specific 1961 date.) CONTENTdm

  3. Subscription genealogy databases

    • Some have “U.S., Arriving Crew Lists, 1939–1999” or similar. Search for surname: Trogneux with vessel Michigan and year 1961. (FamilySearch/NARA listings show Seattle microfilm ending at 1957 online, so 1961 is usually offline.) FamilySearch

If you want, I can help draft a one-paragraph email you can paste to NARA so they pull the exact manifest/crew list page for you.

You said:
What do you think of the book Chaos by Tom O'Neill? It claims that Charles Manson was brainwashed by the CIA to commit murders.
ChatGPT said:

Tom O’Neill’s Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties (2019, co-written with journalist Dan Piepenbring) is an unusual book.

Here’s the gist:

What the book argues

  • O’Neill started in the late 1990s on a commissioned magazine piece about the 30th anniversary of the Manson murders. The short article ballooned into a 20-year investigation.

  • He became convinced that the official story (Vincent Bugliosi’s Helter Skelter) is incomplete or misleading.

  • Chaos suggests links between Manson and various shadowy networks:

    • CIA mind-control (MK-Ultra): O’Neill noticed that Manson and associates repeatedly encountered researchers and doctors connected to MK-Ultra-style experiments (especially around drug use and behavior modification).

    • Law enforcement leniency: Despite numerous parole violations and arrests, Manson was repeatedly released, which O’Neill sees as evidence that he was protected or useful.

    • Potential manipulation: The book raises the possibility that Manson was a subject (knowingly or not) of experimentation—though it never proves a direct CIA order to commit the Tate-LaBianca murders.

Strengths

  • Meticulous digging: O’Neill spent two decades going through court files, FBI records, parole hearings, interviewing witnesses, and uncovering inconsistencies in the official narrative.

  • Documented connections: He did find real links between some figures in the Manson orbit and people tied to MK-Ultra research.

  • Exposes flaws in Helter Skelter: Even critics admit Bugliosi’s neat “race war” story glossed over complexities.

Weaknesses

  • No smoking gun: The book does not prove that the CIA brainwashed Manson or directed the murders. It builds a circumstantial case full of unanswered questions.

  • Speculative leaps: Some connections are tenuous—critics say O’Neill sometimes stacks coincidences and suggestions without hard evidence.

  • Narrative style: It’s more a journalistic exploration of mystery and cover-up than a tightly argued historical thesis.

Reception

  • Positive: Praised for unsettling research, raising serious questions, and showing how messy the Manson story really is.

  • Critical: Scholars and reviewers note that while it undermines Bugliosi’s tale, it doesn’t replace it with a solid, evidence-based alternative.

✅ My take: Chaos is valuable as an investigative work that pokes holes in the official narrative and demonstrates that government agencies were doing ethically dubious experiments during that era. But the “Manson was brainwashed by the CIA to commit murders” claim goes beyond what the book actually demonstrates—it’s more of a suspicion O’Neill can’t close the loop on.

Would you like me to break down which parts of O’Neill’s research are documented fact (like known MK-Ultra doctors he found in Manson’s circle) versus the more speculative leaps?

You said:
yes please. And explain more about the MK-Ultra doctors
ChatGPT said:

Great — let’s break this down carefully into documented facts O’Neill unearthed versus speculative leaps he makes in Chaos. Then I’ll give you more detail on the MK-Ultra doctors.

1. Documented Facts O’Neill Brings Out

These are supported by records or on-the-record interviews:

  • Parole leniency for Manson:

    • Before the Tate–LaBianca murders (1969), Manson had many parole violations (weapons, drugs, transporting underage girls across state lines). Normally, he should have gone back to prison.

    • Instead, he was repeatedly released. O’Neill documents that parole officers and prosecutors knew about his violations but failed to act.

  • Manson’s ties to Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic (San Francisco):

    • Manson and his followers frequently visited the clinic, particularly the “Research Unit” where patients were studied.

    • The clinic’s director, Dr. David Smith, was publishing work on LSD, amphetamines, and group behavior in the late 1960s.

  • Connections to known CIA-funded researchers:

    • At the clinic, Dr. Louis “Jolly” West, a psychiatrist directly tied to MK-Ultra, was conducting studies on violent offenders and drug effects.

    • Dr. Sidney Gottlieb (the CIA chemist who ran MK-Ultra) doesn’t appear directly, but many of the doctors O’Neill identifies were in programs receiving CIA funding.

  • Patterns of drug experimentation:

    • Manson’s group was saturated in LSD, speed, and mescaline at a time when CIA-linked researchers were explicitly studying how those drugs influenced suggestibility, control, and violence.

    • O’Neill shows that Manson had access to unusually pure LSD (the kind not generally available on the street, but seen in government/academic labs).

2. Speculative Leaps

These go beyond what the evidence actually proves:

  • Manson as an intentional subject of MK-Ultra:

    • O’Neill can’t show a paper trail that Manson was officially enrolled in CIA experiments.

    • He speculates that the parole leniency + drug research connections = tacit protection, possibly to observe his behavior.

  • Murders as outcome of brainwashing:

    • The leap from “Manson was around CIA-connected drug researchers” → “the murders were a CIA mind-control project” is never proven.

    • At best, O’Neill shows that Manson was in an environment thick with MK-Ultra-style experimentation.

3. The MK-Ultra Doctors in the Book

Here are the key figures O’Neill connects:

  • Dr. Louis Jolyon “Jolly” West

    • Famous psychiatrist who once killed an elephant with a massive LSD dose in Oklahoma.

    • Directly funded by the CIA (through MK-Ultra subprojects) to study hypnosis, drug effects, and coercion.

    • Later known for examining Jack Ruby (Oswald’s killer) and Patty Hearst.

    • Involved with UCLA’s Neuropsychiatric Institute and advised on projects about controlling violent behavior.

  • Dr. David Smith

    • Founder of the Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic.

    • Studied drug effects on youth culture in the 1960s.

    • While not directly tied to MK-Ultra funding, his clinic became a hub for drug research that overlapped with the CIA’s areas of interest.

  • Other peripheral names

    • O’Neill notes that some figures in the orbit of the clinic or California medical research had published papers in the same networks as MK-Ultra contractors.

    • He never finds a “smoking gun” document saying “Manson = subject,” but he shows enough overlap to raise eyebrows.

4. Bottom Line

  • Fact: Manson was oddly protected by the justice system, and he and his followers had recurring contact with doctors linked to CIA-style research.

  • Speculation: That the CIA, through MK-Ultra, brainwashed him into orchestrating the murders.

  • Chaos is strongest when it shows inconsistencies in the Bugliosi/Helter Skelter story; it’s weakest when it tries to pin the murders on CIA mind-control without hard proof.

👉 Would you like me to also give you a short profile of MK-Ultra itself (its methods, goals, and documented abuses) so you can see how the Chaos claims fit into what we know the CIA really did?

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)