As you can directly see, it's age-restricted, which means that you can't view it while logged out.
Anyway, I watched the first 10 minutes. I will concede that it was a little more calmly organized than I was expecting. However, I just don't really buy her central premise which was this:
"I have been alleging that Brigette Macron is a man for a while now, and the Macrons have sent me a cease and desist letter. So I asked them to fill out a 21-question questionnaire to get to the bottom of it, and they won't do it! Doesn't this prove that I'm right and she really is a man after all?"
I think it's more likely that they just don't want to dignify it with a response. Again, I'm just going to need an explanation of why anyone would participate in this conspiracy for 50 years and no one ever blew the whistle. It just seems like she started from a conclusion and worked back to find the evidence, rather than taking the evidence that's already out there and coming to a conclusion from that.
Later, she says that Trump has some kind of dirt on Macron about his sex life, and that it must be that his wife is actually transgender, but I think that's a stretch when it could just be a regular affair - I read some stat one time that every single president of France since WWII has had a sex scandal, and most of the French public just doesn't really care. It just seems like a stretch.
Finally she goes into a long aside about the Olympic opening ceremony last year and how Satanic it was, and I'm not sure what that has to do with anything - I guess she's trying to draw a connection of "France held a Satanic ceremony last year, therefore the Macrons love Satan, which connects them to the LGBT community." Again just seems like an unrelated stretch. Even if she somehow scooped everyone and is somehow right about Macron's gender identity, I'm not seeing a connection here.