STOP EVERYTHING. They FINALLY Mentioned ME In The Blake Lively Lawsuit! | Candace Ep 152
47:06 Share

All right, you guys, happy Wednesday. So we took a one day break yesterday and we somehow time traveled to Christmas morning over here because I was recently name checked in Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds recent filing against Justin Baldoni in Wayfarer Studios. I did it. I made it. I can now retire. All of the haters out there who doubted me are now asking for forgiveness. And I just want to say thank you to all of you who believed in me, who believed in us, who knew that this day would come.

So grab your effing florals and welcome back to Candice. All right, so at first, let's just address the elephant in the room. That's me. I am very pregnant. I announced on my Instagram yesterday that I had to take the day off.

because someone spoke to me improperly on the phone and I was deeply upset by this conversation and I was therefore incapable. I could not trust myself to go live or I would have just been naming names and I would have been ratchet and out of control. And then one of you guys kind of rather hilariously pointed out to me on Instagram that my post was unnecessarily honest. Like I could have just said, oh, I'm not feeling well today. We'll see you guys tomorrow. Or like my dog ate my homework. But

But clearly there's something wrong with me, okay? I'm now at the phase of pregnancy where I'm just like a toddler, toddler honest or like 89-year-old honest. You know, grandma, she says whatever she wants, like in Wedding Crashers. He's a homo. Like, I'm there. Pregnancy does do this to people. And so, yeah, yesterday I got a phone call and it just sent me on a warpath. It was so crazy. It wasn't even that serious in the retrospect, but I was just like...

Suge Knight. I turned into Suge Knight yesterday and I was just going to thug some people and say things. I was like, stand by people too. People that were just going to catch stray bullets. I was like pulling up old emails that upset me. Old...

Text messages like, you know, and that person too. I'm going to out that person too. And my husband's looking at me like, you know, sweetheart, maybe we just don't do your show today. Maybe just take a chill pill. And so I took a chill pill, guys. And that's why we had to go off air. That is the truth. And that's the new excuse going forward. That's the new way. We don't say our dogs ate our homework. We're just dead serious. We're just like someone deeply upset me and I cannot perform my duties today. Anyways, I am better now. I'm happy now. I'm more than better because we did it. Like I said, I am not...

involved in this lawsuit, or at least that's what my lawyer kept telling me. Oh no, you're not a part of this lawsuit. Well, joke's on him because I have now been name-checked in this lawsuit. So let's back it up and I'll explain how we got here. I'm just giddy. It's so much joy right now.

So Judge Lehman, don't forget, the parties all met, kind of a preliminary hearing. It's just the lawyers met. And Judge Lehman of New York instructed both of the parties of the suit to submit a proposed protective order. I think the deadline he gave them was March 10th for a proposed protective order because

Both teams agreed that some kind of a protective order would indeed be appropriate for this case to protect confidential information. Now, as we reported, Brian Friedman and Wayfarer wanted essentially a model protection order, which is indeed standard. It's a standard protection order. But on the 20th,

which was, I think, last Friday, Blake's team filed for a slightly modified type of protection order that would include increased protections to third parties. Now, we covered this filing. I told you that essentially what was buried in it was what I would describe as the Taylor Swift clause. I'm just calling it the Taylor Swift clause, essentially allowing the respective lawyers to

To just deem anything that they want, attorney's eyes only. Right. So they get a document and they're just like, you know what, this one, you can see it, Brian, but it's attorney's eyes only. You can't show you can't show that to anybody else. So it's really important that you guys understand this differentiation. Like we have to distinguish between the two, what a standard court protective order is and what Blake Lively's team is asking for, which is an attorney's eyes only designation.

So the standard model one is referred to as a model protective order. The court model protective order is something that they had previously agreed to. It just means keeping some of the material that will come out through the course of a high profile lawsuit away from the general public. Most importantly, because it's just irrelevant stuff that has no bearing on the legal consequences of the case, but might unintentionally stir the public.

Example, they subpoena my financial records because I'm alleging that something was done that led to severe financial consequence in my life. So the other side says, okay, we're gonna subpoena your financial records later

And in the process, they become privy to things that might embarrass me, like the fact that yesterday when I was in a bad mood, I ate two bagels in the morning. I did. I had two full bagels in the morning. And that's just public fodder. You guys don't need to know that. It's deeply embarrassing. And a standard protective order would keep how many bagels that I ate yesterday morning out of your eyes and ears. It's just not for the general public. But of course...

The opposing side to the suit, plus the witnesses and the jurors, would be able to see that sort of information. OK, so that's just like too much for the public. But yes, we've got this because it's relevant to the case. Her financial records are relevant to the case. So attorneys eyes only is a different designation.

It's essentially a request for documents that could indeed be extremely relevant to the case. And they're saying, we only want this to be shared between the attorneys, not even with the parties to the suit. So that means, you know, Brian Friedman can see it, their lawyers can see it, but we're talking like not even Melissa Nathan or Justin Baldoni could see it because it might be very damaging to third parties. So to give you an example, if Brian Friedman

Friedman subpoenas Taylor Swift's text messages. Wink, wink. That's what I want. That's what I want to see. And it reveals that actually Taylor Swift was LOLing with Blake Lively about being a dragon. She was like, yeah, I'm a dragon. And she was like plotting the takeover of the movie because she's bored and it's Tuesday and Jo Alwyn isn't responding to her text messages anymore and she's already finished her album. Well, Blake Lively's team is essentially requesting the rights for

their attorney to just designate that AEO, attorney eyes only, because that might unfairly harm the reputation of Taylor Swift.

So to be clear, if the judge actually grants that kind of a protection order, the attorneys would become the judge of what exactly could be designated AEO. Does that make sense? I hope that makes sense. I used a lot of examples there that were very strong examples. So let's revisit the language from Blake's initial filing asking to strengthen the protective order.

So they filed this on February 20th, like I said, and it says the proposed P.O. defers from this court's model P.O. primarily by adding the following and attorney's eyes only category, which applies to confidential discovery material of such highly confidential and personal, sensitive or proprietary nature that the revelation of such is likely to cause a competitive business, commercial, financial, personal or

or privacy injury. Specific examples of categories of discovery material that may qualify as confidential or AEO discovery information in a case of this nature, including, for example, previously non-disclosed information unique to the entertainment industry, such as, for example, creative ideas or client relationships or information of a personal or intimate nature in a case of

involving high-profile individuals and allegations of sexual harassment. Okay, so that's what they were alleging. This is really to protect these third parties, but they're also kind of saying that people are high-profile, but also kind of trying to slide this idea that we're also protecting these because these are other victims of sexual harassment, which would be included in this. That's why we should definitely do this. So what ended up happening was yesterday,

Justin Baldoni's attorneys got back regarding that filing and they basically called them out, as they always do. And I'm going to show you what they said. They said, given how actively the Lively parties have publicized and litigated Ms. Lively's claims in the media, we are surprised to now learn how vehemently she wants to prevent the public from accessing material and relevant evidence.

The Lively parties provided the New York Times with Ms. Lively's otherwise confidential administrative complaints filed with the California Civil Rights Department and thousands of pages of original documents, including, um,

Including text messages and emails. So that's kind of like a pretty strong argument because they're saying we're just like to remind the public that it was clearly her team who leaked private text messages and leaked emails without any due process at all to The New York Times. So why are they coming at us pretending that like, oh, such a thing could potentially ruin careers when it seems like that's exactly what you were doing when you released these messages that only you had?

Obviously, only you had them. And you're alleging that you received some of this via subpoena, whatever it is, but this was handed to The New York Times.

They then go on to say that Ms. Lively's counsel and spokesperson routinely attempted to rehabilitate her tarnished image with making bold statements to the press, such as characterizing the Wayfarer parties as, quote unquote, another chapter in the abuse playbook, or trying to convince the press that her amended complaint saves her meritless claims by referencing other purported victims, although she fails to name a single one.

Worst of all, in a planned skit on NBC's Saturday Night Live 50th anniversary special, which attracted 15 million viewers, Miss Lively's husband Ryan Reynolds stood up and made a joke about her claims for sexual harassment and emotional distress. Yeah, it's a pretty strong argument. Now you're saying like anything being revealed to the public would be too much. But weren't you guys the one that like made like a whole movie? Disgusting.

Deadpool about what was happening. Your whole thing was a publicity tour. You know, it's giving like a never ending publicity tour, but I want my privacy, Meghan Markle type vibes. Like, is there a little bit of a conflict between the words coming out of your attorney's mouths and your actions? That's what he is asking. And I want to say this, what he should have included, since I have now appointed myself a lawyer in this suit, not just a party and not just somebody who's a victim, but also a lawyer to the suit. I'm everything.

I also find it interesting that they're trying to pretend that it's a case that they're essentially trying to protect people who may have been victimized by sexual harassment.

When it was actually Blake Lively in that initial filing that said everything but the name, right? Like when she was trying to imply like, wink, wink, I'm not going to name Lily Bloom. She was like pulling the Kanye. I'm not going to say who it was. And then she just says it. She's like, I'm not, I don't want to name anybody else in this too. But if you actually go back and review her initial filing from December 31st or December 20th, also her CRD complaint,

She lets us know that it is Isabella Farrow. It's almost laughable. I mean, look at this point, point 54 from her original filing.

Mr. Baldoni added a detailed scene to the film in which the underage version of Miss Lively's character, Lily, loses her virginity. In both the book and the script, there was no sex scene. Instead, the details about this moment were left to the audience's imagination, but Mr. Baldoni added in considerable details, including both dialogue between young Lily and her boyfriend about the loss of her virginity, as well as a simulated sex scene in which Mr. Baldoni filmed and included in his initial cut of the film.

the film, a close-up of young Lily's face accompanied by an audible gasp at the moment of penetration. Miss Lively was informed when this scene was shot. After Mr. Baldoni called cut, he walked over to the actor's chair and said, I know I'm not supposed to say this, but that was hot.

Did you two practice that? We know that's Isabella Farrow. Like, it's ridiculous. Then another point in the suit, she mentions a mutual friend, a quote-unquote another female cast member that's friends with Jamie Heath and Justin Baldoni. Liz Plank. She's basically saying everything. She's like, it's Schmish Schmank. It's Schmish Schmella Farrow Schleller. I'm not going to tell you who it is, but it rhymes with Schmish Schmella Schmarer.

And slizz slank.

That's all I'm saying. So it's ridiculous for her to pretend that she was trying to protect these women. She was desperately trying to signal to the public by dropping not even Easter eggs, just pointed blanket statements like that. So it's a crap argument. The point of this filing is supposed to be for Taylor Swift. Again, I'm showing you that point when she talks about Liz Plank and her filing, making it very clear. It says here in point 10 on May 24, 2023, Ms. Lively confided in a text to a woman who was a mutual friend of Mr. Baldoni and Mr. Heath.

Quote, I was going to invite you to set tomorrow. These people. Whoa. It's like H.R. Nutsday. The both of them. I wasn't expecting that turn. I mean, it's been present today, but I came home and cried. And so she talks about how she's creeped out, whatever it is. I don't want your male gaze or your words or your tongue or your videos or your naked wife. Yeah, it's shocking clowns. And Liz Plank obviously was friends with Jamie Heath and Justin Baldoni because they had the podcast together.

So it's very obvious who she is referring to in all of these filings. And it is just pointedly ridiculous that she's pretending that the nature of these filings has anything to do with sexual harassment or sexual abuse. Rather, it has to do with her trying to protect Taylor Swift. Okay. So anyways, getting back to the response to this. So now Blake Lively's. This gets to me. I'm coming up, guys. Hey, it's me. Hi, Mom. Look, I made it. We're getting here. Okay. Okay.

So they then file also yesterday and they are basically arguing to their argument. They're saying like, actually, here's the issue.

It says the model P.O. So essentially, again, that is what Brian's team is saying that the court model P.O. is enough. We want nothing extra. And they're saying the model P.O. defines parties or parties as those who are parties to the action. It does not reference third parties or expressly apply its process to them. So they're saying it doesn't go far enough. Taylor Swift won't be protected. And.

OK, fine. I don't know if that's true. I'm not familiar with that language, obviously. But then they go on to say that the opposition ignores that the proposed P.O. would extend the right to designate materials as A.E.O. to parties and third parties alike, some of whom have already faced online harassment, threats and attempted intimidation. So she's like, we need to extend the

these third party protections because some of these people are already getting threats and intimidation and they're being bothered online. Yeah. Hey, genius lawyer, that defeats your whole argument. It means the public already knows who these people are. OK, so you're sitting here saying you've got to protect them. We know who they are because of your filing. So if they're already being like if you file this order, it's not going to stop millions of people in the world for saying from saying Isabella Farah, you should speak up.

It doesn't extend to the world. So it's making your argument moot. Again, she has terrible emotional lawyers who don't think through the arguments that they're making. And then it says counsel for wayfarer parties recently public. This is always the emotional plea. They have to drop at least once in every filing that they're women. And it's making me sick, but it's fine. I'll read it.

Council for Wayfarer Parties recently publicly stated in an interview with TMZ that Wayfarer, Justin and their representatives have no ill will nor vendetta against anyone who speaks up in any circumstance and have firsthand experience with and empathy for the struggles of going against incredibly powerful individuals. The moving parties respectfully suggest that

that the Wayfarer parties can actualize those professed goals, that is to facilitate the pursuit of truth and to empower third parties, including the victims of sexual harassment, to stand up to incredibly powerful individuals. I find this to be hilarious because they are doing the exact opposite. They are actually protecting incredibly powerful individuals. Like I said, I see right through this. This is the Taylor Swift program.

protection order. I'm not calling anything different. It is a Taylor Swift protection order. She's a very powerful person. It is her who will have her brand hurt. Her is the only relationship that they want to actually protect. Like I said, everyone else was just on the chessboard. They will ruin Isabella Farrah for sports. They will ruin the career of Brandon Sklenar. They don't care about that. They don't care about Liz Plank. I mean, really, do we need an expert on what a bromance is? These people were just like

useful idiots to them. But Taylor Swift, for a narcissist, for two narcissists, they're like, that's what we want. We love power. We love feedback. We want to save this relationship. So we're going to file this, pretend it has something to do with something else that we can then go to her and say, we got you, babe. I got you, babe. It's totally fine. Then they go on and they start to argue about the specific tenets of paragraph nine of the model PO. And they basically say that

This designation is moot because if he's already said basically Brian Freeman has already said that he doesn't believe Blake Lively and that she thinks that she wants publicity and that she's proven that she wants publicity. And so if we do the model P.O., the two of us attorneys will have to go to the judge if we have a disagreement, because in the model P.O., you guys can look at the documents. You can say, oh, this is Taylor Swift's text messages.

The lawyers from both opposing sides come together, look at the messages and they say, OK, let's let's not make this one public. And they agree. Well, her lawyers are saying they're never going to agree because Brian Friedman's just crazy. And so what then would happen is each time we'd have to go to the judge to make a decision. And that's just a waste of court resources. That's the argument they're making. It's a waste of court resources. Sweetheart.

This entire lawsuit is a waste of court resources. Let's stop pretending that like this part right here is where it gets bad. The whole thing is a waste of court resources, okay? Until you guys scream uncle and realize that we're not gonna let you out of this. We are wasting court resources. Let's not pretend that you care about that now. And here is where it gets to me. I'm so excited. The last paragraph, I can't believe it. Here it is.

This is my big day. Is everybody watching? I just want to make sure everyone's watching. Everybody at home, it's me. Hi. Okay. So they wrote in the last paragraph, certain online content creators who frequently parrot the Wayfarer Party's line, at least one of whom, at least one of whom just so happens to be a client of Wayfarer's counsel, Brian Friedman, have used similar misleading accusations. So they wrote in the last paragraph,

So that little petty betty was a mention for Perez Hilton. So they wanted to get that in there. They want the public to know that Perez Hilton, who has been covering this extensively, has a conflict of interest because apparently he was a client to Brian Freeman. But there's a little bit of dirt thrown on me here because I'm the only other person that gets mentioned. And I want to be clear. They said at least one of whom just so happens. So they're like kind of trying to signal like, oh, but Candace could be too. So let me clarify. I am not...

I have never spoken to Brian Friedman in my life. And it hurts me deeply. As I said to you guys, like he and I are connected in the stars or something. Like, you know, he might be my brother from another mother. I've never spoken to Justin Baldoni. He's literally my cousin. Okay, so we're talking about a family that's been torn apart. We've never even met each other. We're a long lost family. So don't you try to put this little, this little, maybe even other people, because then they mentioned me and they say, they quote my tweets.

And I'm not sure what argument they're making because I'm not sure what argument they're ever making because their entire lawsuit is just filled with contradictions. But they use my tweet and they say late last night, which is what I said. I tweeted this late last night while we all slept. Lake Lively and Ryan Reynolds filed a protective order. The guilty as sin couple is asking a judge to protect from the public some confidential documents and names that will be gathered in the discovery process.

And then after they put my tweet, they write, predictably, the media outlets picked up the same narrative. Okay, yeah, but that's what you did. Like, what am I guilty of here? What am I guilty of here? Like,

leading the pack of people because like what we're psychotic and we're checking your filings every day. And we said, oh, look, yeah, she's filing for more protection to protect. She thinks it's confidential documents. We just read through this. We showed the public that's what you're doing. So I don't understand why I got name checked here. And then just to say predictably, the media outlets picked up the same narrative. They're like, they got me out here looking like Regina George when she cuts her shirt.

And then everybody just starts cutting their shirts. It's like, no, I'm just telling the truth. And I don't understand what your problem is with me other than the fact that I am under your skin. I'm so excited. I'm under their skin. Blake and Ryan are watching. You know what's going to happen? I want to be very clear, guys. You know where we're headed? I can see us barreling toward this future.

I am going to be put not just in the Deadpool movies, but all over that next Taylor Swift album. I'm going to be, you guys are going to be Easter egg hunting. She's going to have songs about me. She'd be like,

Nothing rhymes with kombucha. Yeah, there's going to be a whole song and teenagers are going to be singing in the air. You took this. He's not even your cousin. Nothing rhymes with kombucha. I'm excited. And I'm going to go to the concert. I told you my little girl, she likes Taylor Swift music and I am bopping to London Boy forever. But the point of the fact of the matter of everything that is going on is no.

Okay, I'm not Judge Lehman. I'm not Brian Friedman. I'm not Justin Baldoni. I'm not Wilkie Farr Gallagher. But I am the public jury lawyers, both lawyers, both parties. I have to be able to make a decision on my own show. And I'm telling you that we are not accepting this. Okay, I want the Taylor Swift text messages. I deserve the Taylor Swift text messages. Okay, I've worked incredibly hard for the Taylor Swift text messages.

Years, okay? I mean, not years, but like everyone can see that I have made a real effort. And now that you have name-checked me and I'm under your skin, I'm going to be there for a very long time. I'm not going to let go. I'm like a pit bull, okay? I'm onto you. I see what's happening. And you're just throwing me in here, but trying to make people think that I'm somehow connected to Brian Freeman when I'm not. But it will be in the future, okay? That's my brother from another mother, and you're messing with my cousin, and I'm pregnant.

Okay. I'm feeling like sugar night yesterday. You guys lucky you didn't run into me yesterday. There would have been problems, problems in these streets. And that's all I'm going to say about that topic.

Now onto a much nicer topic, Preborn. I love them. They sponsor this show. You know, we have so much in part of the pro-life movement that we do to kind of conquer Planned Parenthood, spending so many millions to target what we deem to be vulnerable women, convincing them that the abortion pill is a quick, easy solution. But what actually happens afterwards is that there's so much devastation that follows. Women feel pain, they feel regret, and they sometimes really come to terms quickly with the reality that they have ended a life. And that's why Preborn is stepping in through innovative technology to

They are reaching abortion-determined women before they take that pill, before it's too late. In fact, to date, Preborn's network of clinics has rescued over 300,000 lives, and they have seen over 90,000 women come to Christ. And it does not stop there. Preborn's network of clinics are with these moms every step of the way. They offer counseling, maternity supplies.

and the support that they need to choose life. And they cannot do this without us. So I always ask that you give $28, provides an ultrasound to a woman in a crisis. That is it. It's $28 and it helps her see her baby and choose life instead. So to donate, just dial pound 250 and say the keyword baby. That's pound 250 baby. Or you can donate securely at preborn.com slash Candice. That's preborn.com slash Candice.

Also reminding you guys of home title lock for you guys who are homeowners because there is a scam going on. They can literally steal your home right out from under you. The FBI calls it house stealing and it's a growing real estate scam that targets American homeowners. And here's how it works.

Criminals can forge your signature on one document. They use a fake notary stamp. They pay a small fee and they file it with your local recorder's office. And just like that, your home title has been transferred out of your name. So let me ask you, when was the last time that you even checked your home title? You're like me. The answer is probably never. And that's exactly what these scammers are counting on. And that's why I trust Home Title Lock.

Their million-dollar triple lock protection helps keep your home and equity safe. With Home Title Lock, you'll get immediate 24-7 monitoring of your property, urgent alerts if there are any changes, and if fraud should happen, their U.S.-based restoration team will spend up to $1 million to fix the fraud and restore your title at no additional cost. And here's the best part. I've teamed up with Home Title Lock to give you a free title history report that you can find out if you're already a victim and access your personal title expert.

a $250 value just for signing up. So go to hometitlelock.com and use promo code CANDICE250 or click on the link in the description. That's hometitlelock.com, promo code CANDICE250 to get the protection and peace of mind that you deserve. Okay, guys, this also was going viral and it's just funny and weird. People are just being weird now. I don't know what happens. People go down to DC, you get these people into office and they just start getting weird. And one person said,

who's gotten a little strange, is Dan Crenshaw. So we should discuss him altogether because I think in my political career, I don't know that I have ever been more wrong about a person. And I pride myself on my gut instincts. So I'm hoping that something just happened along the line because when Dan Crenshaw first appeared on the scene, he seemingly had it all, definitely checked all the boxes for conservatives because we're like,

He's a veteran and he truly sacrificed his health to defend the country. And he also seemed to have a really good sense of humor and he wasn't exactly polarizing, which was nice. It was kind of nice to have a non-polarizing person. If you guys don't remember him, there was this notorious moment when Pete Davidson went on to SNL and he made fun of Dan Crenshaw.

because he had an eye patch and then there was like a conservative backlash against SNL and Pete Davidson came under like major heat and rather than like adding to the hate campaign against Pete Davidson Dan Crenshaw did this really cool thing he teamed up with Pete Davidson and they did a skit together on SNL and it just felt nice it was like okay we can like take a brief pause on hating each other and we can all agree that it's cool that they have come together

And I don't know what's happened since. I feel like that's where he peaked. And I was thinking at that time he was presidential material. I was wrong. Very wrong. You don't get it right all the time, but you don't always get it that wrong. And I got it that wrong. OK, so fast forward for those of you that don't follow conservative politics that much. He just started getting angry. OK, so.

And I mean, like, can't answer a basic question about your ideas without snapping on people angry. And I'm going to give you an example of that. There was this town hall, a tea party town hall, and this young teenage girl asked him a question, as you are allowed to do at town halls. You're supposed to ask politicians questions. And she was particularly concerned about something that he had said on a podcast about Jesus Christ and whether or not he was a hero.

So just look at how young she sounds and looks and how politely she asks the question and ask yourself if Dan Crenshaw's response makes you comfortable. Take a listen. The most important thing here is that we have important hero archetypes that we look up to. Jesus is a hero archetype. Superman is a hero archetype. Real characters, too. I could name a thousand. Rosa Parks, Ronald Reagan, end quote.

I can't wrap my head around this. I'll help you. Put a period out of the word Jesus and don't question my faith. Wow. You moron. Talk to a kid like that. Don't question my faith.

People in the background are just like, don't talk to a kid like that. Mind you, this is amongst his peers. There's just been a lot of that like bubbling anger over the years. You're not allowed to ask Dan Crenshaw any questions about what he believes or what he says. You're not allowed to ask him about the contradictions of saying you're America first, but also giving money overseas to never ending wars, especially Israel. He just kind of snaps and calls people names. But I think that that

That really demonstrates I just feel like you should have this natural male instinct when someone that young accepts you with a voice like that and sounds so innocent and is asking a genuine question of what you said and you just freaking slammer. And he's not pregnant. As far as I know, he is not pregnant. So it's a bit strange. So recently he was interviewed by a journalist named Stephen Eddington, who works for GB News that's overseas the UK. And

And when the interview had concluded, he was still mic'd up, obviously, because it doesn't like magically like disintegrate. You obviously have your mic on still. And the camera was directly in front of him. And he's caught on the hot mic. And Stephen asks him if he's ever met Tucker Carlson. And he responds, we talked a lot on Twitter, but if I ever meet him, I'll effing kill him. I'm going to kill Tucker Carlson. You're going to kill Tucker Carlson. You can't kill Tucker Carlson. Anyways, here's the clip. Have you ever met Tucker? No.

Okay, and so was he joking? Well, Stephen Edgington, the journalist, said that he was not. He shared that clip onto his X feed. Then he deleted it thereafter. But at the time that he shared it, he said that he kept receipts of the remark. And he also claimed that Crenshaw told him when he laughed...

which we didn't get to see that he wasn't joking. Like he's just going to kill Tucker Carlson, which is like, it's a bit extreme. Anyways, this is now the deleted tweet right here. I laughed it off. He said, no, seriously, I would kill him. Okay. I don't know what to make of that. Now, some people were asking, is that fair game? Is it fair game to catch him on a hot mic?

And those people clearly have not been following Dan Crenshaw because there doesn't need to be a hot mic around. OK, this is who he now is in public. He represents himself as someone who's really angry, who just wants to maybe hurt people physically to get that anger out. And I'll give you another example. There was a time that he freaked out when someone questioned him regarding a spending bill. Take a listen.

I don't know if you saw this, but someone had put out a tweet saying Dan Crenshaw is pushing for this bill because it includes a 40% pay raise for member of Congress. And Dan Crenshaw had recently been complaining that like, oh, we don't make enough money. We're like destitute. I want to quote it exactly. It's just hilarious. So he responds to this guy on X and he says, you f***ing lying piece of s***. But hey, whatever gets you pathetic bottom feeders clickbait, you f***ing incel. So now if you're against Dan Crenshaw's spending bill, you're like an incel or something. You don't have enough sex. Yeah. Dan Crenshaw,

obviously is not emotionally prepared to lead anything he's out of control and i think that he's a really volatile person i hope he gets help i mean that but you know he's also a pretty sinister person i would say whose priorities are not aligned with this party's voters but also have kind of nothing to do with the united states i feel sorry for dan crunch i've had conflict with dan crunch i felt like he was emotionally out of control and

So I feel sorry for him. But I also think it's not just him. It's a lot of leadership of that party just doesn't put the United States first at all. Like fair critique. I don't know if you guys are comfortable with that, but I don't think that any sitting congressperson should be responding with such volatile and anger and like wanting to.

challenge people to fight if they have a disagreement or a question about a spending bill. That's literally why you're elected. People are allowed to question you and question how you're voting. That's that's how politics work. And if you're ill-equipped emotionally to be able to respond to those questions, maybe you shouldn't be in Congress, obviously. Anyway, Sucker replied to his little death threat or whatever it is, whatever you want to call it.

whether you want to take it seriously or just think of it as just another unhinged Dan Crenshaw moment because he just says stuff because he's angry. And Tucker offered for him to come on his show. He said, why don't you come sit for an interview and we'll see how you do it. We'll see how you kill me. I'll send you my address. And it was weird. Elon Musk obviously just loves to hype. Elon Musk is basically on X. Did you guys used to have the cafeteria O?

in middle school, like for no reason at all, because we're just like effing around. Just one person goes, oh, oh,

Just to like hype. That's Elon Musk on Twitter. So he's just hyping a fight. He's like, why is he homicidal against Tucker, Tucker Carlson? And it's going to be interesting to see how Crenshaw responds to this. Hopefully he does a little better than what he did when Marjorie Taylor Greene asked if he threatened to kill Tucker, even though we all heard it and watched it with our own eyes and the journalist confirmed it. He just said no.

Marjorie Taylor Greene said, did you threaten to kill my friend Tucker Carlson? And Dan Crenshaw just said no. And I respect that. I respect it because when politicians lie, they do it so boldly that you do have to have a little bit of respect for that level of lying. Like you did not see or hear anything. Anyways, you guys just wanted you to know that this...

seems to be boiling over. This is a little montage of Tucker Carlson and Dan Crenshaw. It's been happening for years. They don't like each other, but I think things are really reaching a fever pitch. Take a listen. Dan Crenshaw cannot be a congressman again. You just can't. It's just too insulting. Why is it that Republican states tend to have the least sincere Republican? Dan Crenshaw, apparently still a member of Congress. And the next time

Dan Crenshaw stands up and says, but you don't understand the threat. Shut up, Dan Crenshaw. Just about had it with you. Neocon Congressman Dan Crenshaw, the Nikki Haley of Texas. The single most left-wing member of Congress I've ever met personally is a Republican from this area who has no interest in the United States whatsoever and does not even pretend. I'm not going to name names. Yeah, it's Dan Crenshaw, the most liberal, most left-wing person I've ever met. And so they're easily bullsh**.

by the posturing jackasses in Washington. That's why Dan Crenshaw has a job. You, Dan Crenshaw, you're the one whose own children languished and died while you focused on the neighbor's kids. That person is an enemy of everything that you voted for.

I just love the part there where he just says, I'm not going to name names. Then he's like, Dan Crenshaw. He's just like, pull the cut. I'm not going to. I'm actually going to say it is Dan Crenshaw. And I totally agree with this. And I love people who have the courage to critique their own side or what's supposed to be our own side. It's why I love Tucker Carlson. I'm a huge fan of Tucker Carlson because he...

He remains principled. Whether you like him or you don't like him, if you look throughout the years, he admits when he's wrong and he remains principled and he's willing to stand up when people don't find that opinion to be favorable. And I disagree with him. I think irrespective of how we feel about politics, Dan Crenshaw just seems to be having some sort of a mental breakdown. It's been going on for a while. I've heard weird rumors about him flirting with the Turning Point USA girls at events.

but I can't spill too much right now. My husband has me in timeout. I don't want to have to cancel the show again. Anyways, I wanted to show you guys one more clip because when I was in a really bad mood yesterday, Theo Vaughn, there was a, it just appeared on my Instagram and I was cry laughing. I think Theo Vaughn is hilarious. He has a very strange brand of humor. He just says things that are all over the place. Like,

I don't know what's happening in the headquarters of Theo Vaughn's brain, but I want to hang out there for a day to just see why he thinks the way he does. What was that quote he said that you were quoting, Skylar, about, I like raisins because they're grapes that have been through s**t? That's a Theo Vaughn statement where you're like, what, Theo Vaughn, what are you talking about? Anyways, give me the background of this clip before I show it to you.

I would not categorize him as left or right. He's a comedian. He used to be on Real World Road Rules and a lot of show game shows. And he does a lot of stand up comedy. And now he has a podcast, which has grown very popular. And it's one of the podcasts that Donald Trump went on, which made it even more popular, where he just didn't really speak to Trump much about politics. And he spoke to him more about just like who he is as a person, which was much more relatable than hearing people who hate each other shout at each other throughout an entire interview. So it was I thought it was a very good move.

And anyways, for that reason, Donald Trump invited Theo Vaughn to the inauguration, which is funny. And Theo Vaughn was sitting at the inauguration and his chair broke. I guess they had some ghetto chairs and Theo Vaughn got lucky number, ghetto chair, whatever. And he just, the chair legs just gave out. So first I'll show you him falling in the chair and then I'll show you how he recaps that situation. Take a listen. Oh, it happened. It happened. I said it would. It's fine.

We got to see here. We got to see here. I got it on video. Okay. Now listen to Theo Vaughn describing what he now refers to as chair gate. And you can take me all the way out of this. I just couldn't believe that I was sitting in there and I'm at the damn, they're doing the inauguration, you know, and then the chair broke and I'm like, and you're on the floor and you're like, oh, this isn't good.

And then you just, I thought I'd, I was like, please let me fall through to another world or whatever. Like I looked over at Sam Altman and I was like, designer, you know, I was like, send me into the matrix right now, man. You know, don't make me have to just get up and just be human. So that was a lot. I don't know. Was it a lot? But anyway, it is just is what it is, man. And the best part of it was some rich lady scoffed at me. It's like, Oh, Oh, Oh.

As if she had to watch one of her own dogs. You know, those people that are really rich. They have someone else walk their dogs. So they never really know that their dogs or whatever. She was like, whoa. She grabbed her husband's arm or something. I'm like, yeah, you got it right. You're sitting in the wrong section. You in section eight, boo boo. These chairs busted his head, brother.

It's just so good. I just love the sound effect for a really rich woman who's offended that you've just done something out of pocket. And she's just like, no, I don't know why this person's sitting near me. You're

You're in the back, lady. You're in section eight. Respect, Theo. I got to tell you, that literally put me... I watched it like 10 times yesterday. It just puts me in a great mood, so I just had to share it with you. I had to sprinkle some good mood on you guys because it's Wednesday. It's hump day. You're almost at the halfway or more than halfway point of the week, and Theo Vaughn is just really random. So...

Tell you guys about American financing and then I'll jump into some of your comments. OK, I know the average person today is feeling the financial strain more than ever. Expenses are up. Wages aren't keeping pace and many people are finding it nearly impossible to make ends meet. Not the person, the rich lady in front of the Ovan, but the rest of the world.

With little left over after covering the basics, it's no surprise that many are resorting to credit cards just to get by, often carrying high balances and interest rates in the 20s or even 30s. So if you're a homeowner and you're stuck in the cycle of mounting debt, you need to call my friends at American Financing because their salary-based mortgage consultants are saving homeowners an average of $800 a month, helping you put your hard-earned money back where it belongs. Plus, if you act now, you might not even...

be able to skip, you might be able to, pardon, skip your next month's mortgage payment. There are no upfront fees, so it costs you nothing to find out how much you could be saving each month. It's time to break free from the stress of debt. Talk to American Financing today and take control of your financial future. Call 800-795-1210. Again, that's 800-795-1210. Or you can visit AmericanFinancing.net slash Owens. That's AmericanFinancing.net slash Owens. All right, guys, let's see what is on your mind. By the way, fun announcement.

First and foremost, a couple announcements. There's going to be a new Shot in the Dark episode up on the website. That will be episode 12, the polio vaccine. That's a really important one for parents to watch because that's the one that they do all the dramatic, like, we cured polio. And like, do you want polio to come back?

Woo! Lies, misrepresentations, girlfriend. Let me tell you, please watch that episode. If you watch no other episode, watch the polio vaccine episode. You are going to come out of it shaken because that is always the one that people on autopilot about vaccines say, oh, but what about polio? Which, by the way, we've all been there. I'm not judging you. Like I said, if I didn't get personally injured from Gardasil, I would have been one of the people going, but polio, what about the polio? We cured polio.

So that will be up also. Guys, if you're watching this live on YouTube, subscribe. We're so close.

to 4 million subscribers. I just feel like we can do that. Everyone watching right now hit, hit and get me to 4 million so we can celebrate and drop a new Sandus cup. And, um, thank you for all of you guys who were at the book club yesterday. We meet every two weeks and it's been amazing. I absolutely love it. It's a totally different vibe, uh, you know, way more chill. And it's just interesting to talk about concepts and to really be able to go down the rabbit hole and be a conspiracy theorist in the comfort of our own little book club. Uh,

Also, what else did I have? I think I had one more announcement, but I can't remember it. Oh, I,

I have solved the little legal hurdle that was making me have to kind of delay the Harvey series until I got figured out. Hopefully tomorrow, oh, definitely tomorrow, I can tell you a lot more about that series, more about the phone calls that I've had with him. So I'm really excited to spill on that and start activating the TikTokers and the sleuth moms and sleuth dads to take a look back into that case. Okay, let's get into some comments. We have Jesse who writes, Candace, I shot you an email saying,

I'm $400 confident it's worth your attention if you see this. Absolutely love your show and congrats on the new CBS deal. Hope to chat soon. That CBS deal is fake. I don't know why people keep saying that, that me and Megyn Kelly did not sign a deal with CBS. There's like these Facebook accounts that just like create memes and they pretend that it's like breaking news and it's never happened. So that's not happening, unfortunately. I will be continuing to speak to you guys in my podcast where I'm comfortable and happy.

Dahlia writes, Cousin Candace are lively in Reynolds name dropping you because they're shook by your ability to stir the pot without breaking a sweat. Or is this their slick way of asking you to narrate the Netflix doc? I don't know. I don't know what they're thinking, but I was excited. I was very excited. Like I said, I actually I believe the purpose of that was just to kind of throw a little dirt.

to try to imply something like, oh, there's probably something there with Candace. She's got to be working for someone. It's like, no, guys, there's no conspiracy. OK, I'm interested in this case because I really think Blake Lively sucks. And I think Ryan Reynolds is a bully. And I have just written myself into this narrative. I did. I wrote myself into this narrative. I'm not going anywhere. This is where I belong. This is where I feel at home. I'm mom. I'm

I made it proud of myself. Okay. Isabel writes, I think many would agree that your ops have increased significantly lately. If possible, having someone from your team check in when you go MIA like yesterday would be greatly appreciated. You're very sweet. You missed me so much. I did. I did. I posted on Instagram that I couldn't come to the phone right now because somebody spoke to me improperly. I was about as honest as I could get.

And I'm good. It was just a rare Suge Knight breakdown. Sometimes people have a little Suge Knight breakdown. And I was too thug life. I was way too thug. I was ghetto. I

I was out of control yesterday. OK, I did everybody a favor. I caged myself and woke up in a better mood. I hope no more of those days happen. It came unexpectedly. I'm ashamed of myself. I should have done better. Andrea writes, you, Candice, keep it up. Love you, Candice. Keep it up. Praying for you. Thank you so much. The prayers work. They keep me safe. I'm convinced. Dahlia writes, are crying Ryan and lively.

mad that you got a hotter take on their drama than their own press releases. Yeah, probably maybe because people know that they're lying and that they have obviously firms, PR firms that are trying to change the narrative and encourage us not to read documents. And I'm like, I'm here for this. Look at me, Ryan, crying Ryan, fake lively. Look at me. Look at the notes, tations. Like we are here. Look at this. I'm

There's no way out, okay? There is no way out. I am here. I'm paying attention. And we have Rose Kiesel. She writes, Candice, your next bagels are on me. Thank you.

I did actually confess about that. It was a bad day. Yesterday was a bad day. And I shouldn't have eaten two bagels, but I don't want that to become public fodder. So I don't want to mention it anymore beyond this episode. OK, don't talk to me about these bagels anymore, guys. Skadku writes, Candace, can you shed light on what Israel is doing in South Syria? Or, of course, the mainstream media is not covering it. Yeah, you know, I should have back on a couple of people that were experts in that region. It's the only one that's

that I feel that I am not educated enough to speak on, like the backstory of what happened in Syria. And that's why last time I had somebody on who was extremely educated to talk about Syria, you can actually go find that episode. And he, I think he did recently message us and say, can I come back on the show? So we should definitely do another deep dive on everything that's happening in the Middle East. I have just

Scott Horton. If you're looking for that episode, it was a sit down between me and Scott Horton and I did most of the listening and he did most of the speaking and it was just very educational for me because I don't claim to be a geopolitical expert and I try not to speak until I know more about the backstory of certain things. But I definitely can host people that know a lot more and hopefully awaken a lot of people to what's going on around the world. Right now, obviously, I'm deep in a lawsuit that I'm involved in no matter what my lawyer says.

We're just getting closer and closer. He says, I'm still on a party to the suit. Who cares what he says? Noah, if you're watching, I don't care. Okay. I'm telling people that I'm a party to the suit and that's how it's got to be. I'll see you guys tomorrow. Bye.