Transcription
Like the neuroticism that we saw after Charlie died, with like the lying. It was very weird to me. It was like they had to get out first, and they had to lie repeatedly and obsessively and angrily, like, like Josh Hammer. It was like neurotic, and he was just like, you know, like Charlie, buy my book, buy my book, buy my book, buy my book, buy my book, Charlie. Like, it was like totally crazy. It was something. What happened to him when he was a child? Like, why are you doing this? Why is there nothing that moves you spiritually to go, "I'm not going to try to sell my book"? That feels wrong. And also, like, lying about Charlie's state of mind feels wrong. Like, something had to have happened to him when he was a kid. Like, that's my genuine opinion. I don't know the facts.
But is leading people into AI? I have always been sensitive because I'm telling you, I don't even think people are human. Like, I look at Elon Musk and Sam Altman and Peter Thiel, and I'm pretty sure they're hybrid. You know what I mean? Like, they just look like an Apple software that I should be able to download at night, you know?
[Music]
Hi, besties. Welcome back to my channel. So Candace Owens has apparently burned down the internet today again, over on X and basically all over. I shared a clip of her book club on my Instagram, and I literally have noticed in the past, I don't know, couple hours, this video has completely blown up. It has 5,000, 5,600 likes, 4,000 re-shares, 87 comments, and 107 reposts, which is not typical. So, obviously, people are very, uh, either outraged or engaged. They don't really. It's interesting.
Okay, so Candace did a book club a day ago or two days ago, and in her book club, she's covering this book. Let me tell you, Sigmund Freud and the Jewish Mystical Tradition by David Bakan. The book is about Sigmund Freud's relationship with the Jewish mystical tradition, and it's explored through the lens of a 1958 book by psychologist David Bakan. And despite Freud's self-professed atheism, Bakan and others have argued that Jewish mysticism, particularly the Kabbalah, may have unconsciously influenced his psychoanalytic theories. So, the book is the foundational text exploring the connection. The book asserts that Freud's psychoanalysis theory is rooted in Jewish traditions, especially the mysticism of Kabbalah. It argues that his psychology can be viewed as secularized, a secularized version of Jewish mysticism, and it delves into his background, culture, and rather than asserting he was a secret scholar of Jewish mystical lore. The book is considered controversial.
Um, some of the controversies of the book are that it's speculative. It might be far-reaching, often unsubstantiated about Freud and his influences. There's not a lot of direct source material. That's what critics will say. I'm not going to go into like whether or not this book is actually like true or not. It's just something she's been reading with her, you know, followers. She says that this book has taken the scales off of her eyes about, I don't know if it's Judaism or if it's about psychology. Candace herself apparently doesn't appear to be very supportive of psychology as a whole. She's been critical of things like EMDR, and she's very devout in her faith. And in some circles of Catholicism and even Christianity, uh, people view psychology as sort of the anti- of faith. You can't have both together. And some Christians believe you can have both, others don't. Candace appears to be maybe on that line where you shouldn't need psychology to fix your problems as long as you have faith. That's just sort of my high-level view of her on that topic.
But the wider video wasn't really about Charlie Kirk. It wasn't really about, you know, her investigation. It really was an hour and 7 minutes of her basically talking about this book. She's very much on this mission to better understand, uh, the history of Judaism, and she's very much trying to understand the backstory around the conflict between Israel and Palestinians, is, you know, and and the state of Israel. She has openly criticized the Israel occupation of Palestine. She has openly criticized the, what she referred to on her X as genocide against the Palestinian people. She's been very critical of the ongoing conflict between Israel and and Palestine and Hamas since October 7th of 2023. So, her views changed a lot on Israel with what happened on October 7th of 2023 and the and the preceding years that followed. The conflict itself is way too complicated for me to even try to explain here.
But I will say that because she, Candace has taken on a more "Free Palestine" and, uh, supportive of the UN, who is basically stated that Israel is showing benchmarks of having committed genocide. There has been a warrant for the arrest of Bibi Netanyahu for war crimes, you know, an international warrant for his arrest. He's also being charged and tried for fraud. So, you know, there's a lot of criticism of Bibi Netanyahu. And because she's openly critical of the Israeli government and what's happening in Gaza, she has lost a lot of support with the people that are pro-Israel on the right. And there is a very loud group of content creators and journalists on the right that are Zionists that purport to believe that none of the things that have been reported in the media in Gaza have actually happened.
Now, to be clear, Candace's opinions about what's happening in Gaza and Israel aren't unique to her. And I want to just give you some statistics. There was a Gallup poll in July of '25, and it's found that 32% of Americans approved of what was happening in Gaza. Only 32%. 60% of Americans disapproving. So, Candace's beliefs about what's happening in Gaza are held by a majority of Americans according to that poll. Right. A March '25 Gallup poll found that 46% of Americans sympathized more with Israelis, the lowest level in 25 years. And sympathy for Palestinians reached a record high of 33% in that same poll. A Pew Research Center October '25 survey reported that 59% of Americans have an unfavorable view of the Israeli government compared to 41% who had a favorable view in 2014. So, this shift in Israel and how Americans, along with the world, are viewing Israel isn't just Candace. It's a. She holds an opinion now that a majority of Americans hold about what's happened in Gaza. Not, not all of the opinions she holds on Israel are the same as what Americans hold, but people are becoming largely more, uh, critical of Israel.
Now, as far as on the political side, there's a division in in terms of the demographics. So, the in the July poll from Gallup found that 71% of Republicans approved their Israel's action in Gaza. Um, and two-thirds of them had a favorable view of Bibi Netanyahu. And a September '25 Chicago Council poll found Republicans are more likely to say the US support for Israel is about right. A major shift from earlier, earlier in the year. Support for Israel among Democrats has plummeted. A July '25 Gallup poll showed only 8% of Democrats approved the Israel's military action in Gaza. And that's a drop from 36% at the start of the war. And a poll in October '20 found that 77% of Democrats had an unfavorable view of Israel's government.
So, one of the things that I'm seeing on X as it comes to Candace is that a lot of her loudest voices that are coming out against her are very pro-Israel. They're all on the right, conservatively, and many of them are Zionists who believe that Israel has a right to their own nation. Okay? And a lot of times when she's getting a lot of backlash, she addresses that the Zionists are coming after her. One thing I've also noticed in some of the rhetoric, rhetoric is some of these people believe that because she has shifted her opinion on Israel, she now must be a Democrat and that she's really just a staged operative as a Democrat posing as a conservative. And they, they say that because she was once a Democrat that had liberal views, and now people think she is shifting back to the liberal side because she's been kicked out of their club.
But what's got them mad now is that she has made a comment at the end of her book club, which truly wasn't, I know she says that she, she took it seriously, but let me show you what she said in the full context.
"Full steam ahead. Just really needed to just take a breather and, um, really process everything that happened with Charlie and what it kind of means in terms of where we are. And I think it is a circumstance where we all, we just know. We just know that he was truly betrayed in one of the most egregious ways that I think I've ever seen. It has made me lose faith in politics. It's made me fully lose faith in Trump. Um, and I just, like, I just, my heart aches for the fact that he gave so much of his life to Trump and to politics, and they just were like, 'Nope, that is it. It serves us or it doesn't serve us, and we want to move on.' And so here's a holiday, bro. If they try to give me a holiday, what is with them giving people a holiday after they kill them? Why is that a thing? You know what I mean? Like, oh, Martin Luther King, what about this holiday? What about this boulevard? Anyways, let me knock off. Like, they're going to give a boulevard. They already did. They did in Israel. They gave me freaking B. It's like, as soon as they give you a boulevard and a holiday, holiday, they definitely killed you. Okay? There's no question. They killed you. There's no way. That's like their signature thing. It's like that's what they do. It's the, it's the Fed signature. It's how they sign off after they murder you. They're like, holiday in a boulevard. And it's never on a nice side of town either. Like, Charlie Kirk Boulevard is not going to be a nice side of town. Anyways, I will be back on the 27th, you guys. Um, thank you guys for all the support throughout these couple of weeks, these last really kind of six weeks since Charlie died, and, uh, we will see you guys then."
So, from the time that Candace converted from being a Democrat to a conservative, which happened around 2016, and she took on more of a conservative worldview, and then up until 2024, when she left the Daily Wire, when her views started to change around the Israeli government and her views about Judaism started to evolve, her entire career for that, you know, eight-year span was in the Judeo-Christian world, where a lot of her colleagues were Jewish and Zionists, and now she has an opposite view of those of what she was previously promoting, right? And so, a lot of her critics are the people that used to follow her when she was promoting a Christian-Judeo worldview. So, it makes sense that the largest people criticizing her would be the people that were once following her that are now calling her anti-Semitic and they believe that she's lost her mind. Right? A lot of them are talking about how she's mentally ill, but they appear to be most annoyed that she has changed her view on Israel and now that she has changed her view on Donald Trump.
So, she has lost her faith in politics. And I think when you hear her say that, I think that she's lost her identity in that she, for eight years, worked with these people. They were her colleagues. And because she changed her point of view on one topic, all of these people are now shunning her. Now, the people will say, "Well, we're shunning her because these topics, it's so far left of what we are. She's she's acting like a Democrat now. She's not acting like a Republican." A lot of them say that. And the most loud on X, right? I don't believe she's a Democrat. A lot of her views do not align with Democrats, and I'm a Democrat, but I live in a world where we can hold space for everyone to believe what they want regardless.
Because she's now claiming her belief is that the Feds, i.e., the Trump administration, had something to do with the death of Charlie Kirk, along with Israel. And one of her largest critics, who happens to be a Zionist creator, Nathan Livingston, who's a conservative, says, "Candace now directly accusing the Trump administration of killing Charlie Kirk. They definitely killed you." And her response on Twitter or X was, "Zionists are now signing up to my book club to steal my content. I meant every word. And when the Feds are implicated, they always give people a holiday." And then she says, "Sign up to learn more. Why Sigmund Freud says incest inspires their neurotic psychopathic behavior." That's a little tongue-in-cheek because Candace is reading the book, and she, um, is very critical of Sigmund Freud, and it's very clear that she doesn't believe his theories while she was going through the book.
But even accounts that repost Candace are being critical of her. Like MJ Truth Ultra, which is an account that Candace often reposts, says, "Yikes. Candace Owens suggests Donald Trump and Netanyahu assassinated Charlie Kirk. Trump because he proclaimed October 14th, 2025, Charlie Kirk's birthday, as the National Day of Remembrance for Charlie Kirk. And Netanyahu because he announced on September 11th, 2025, that a prominent traffic circle in Israel, often referred to as a square in local parliament, would be renamed Charlie Kirk Square." They wrote, "This is disgusting. This is a disgusting claim in my opinion, regardless of how you feel. When you reach a certain level of people that follow you, trust you, and you have a profound responsibility not to say something like this without showing some kind of proof. Very disappointed in Candace for this."
Now, accusing the federal government of killing Charlie Kirk is pretty out there, and especially accusing Donald Trump, who's someone that she supported, and his administration of being behind this is obviously going to make some conservatives very angry. That's a very big claim to make. It's also, you know, I feel like some of these people have latched on to Candace almost in a way as like they're obsessed with everything she says. They take everything she says and they pull it and they dissect it and they use it to inflame and to make people angry to get people on their side to not like her and not listen to her. In a way, some of these people are pulling these statements to gain their own followers, to get their own people to believe them, and to make people not believe her.
Now, I don't know that in this book club she expected anyone to believe her when she said, "I think the Feds killed him." Implicated. She's very careful with her words. She never directly outright says it's Trump. She never directly outright says that what the involvement is. She did mention the United States government and Israel, but again, she didn't say what they did or how they did it or what happened. And it, again, it's a very big claim to make, right? But I don't think when she was making that claim, she was expecting that to be, uh, part of her investigation, and she's not presenting an investigation when she's making this claim.
I think the punishment for what she says about things is outside of like, there's a lot of people right now that are angry at her because she doesn't hold the same view that they do about Israel. And so everything she says now becomes a catalyst for them to get angry. They get angry about just about everything she says. If she says and talks about bees, they say, "Oh, she's gone crazy. That she thinks it's a bee conspiracy that he's dead." And now she's, uh, referencing a dream. Well, there's a lot of people that are have faith that have prophetic dreams. They do believe that people can talk to them through their dreams, and they feel like in their dreams they have these conversations. And Candace is someone that believes that she has prophetic dreams and that she believes Charlie came to her in a dream. And to criticize that would be actually criticizing someone's entire faith and belief system. So, you know, they can mock her in a conversation she says she had with Charlie in a dream, but then if she criticizes their faith, it's like outrage, right?
So, it's like, is the punishment matching the crime? I don't know. I just think there is a lot of people focusing on everything she says. And I don't know if it's because what she's saying is so outrageous and so irresponsible, or if it's just because we're so mad at her because she doesn't view the world like we do anymore and we feel betrayed. I don't agree with Candace on every topic. I don't agree with most of these Zionists and the dogpiling that they're doing, or even just the conservatives that are dogpiling on her. Everyone in this space should be able to have an opinion without dogpiling. And what's happening right now is a lot of dogpiling. And I think anytime content creators of any side tell people, "You shouldn't follow this person, and if you do, I'm going to unfollow you." That's such a freedom of choice is a huge part of social media, and and it's a very polarizing place to be to say that if you don't support everything I say and everything I believe, you shouldn't follow me. Don't you want your people that are following you to have a different opinion? Don't you want them to have different views? Do you want to live in an echo chamber, or do you want to live in a society where we can have a dialogue about different topics?
And with Candace on her podcast, with her investigation, she's having a dialogue about what she's finding about different topics. And she's, as far as I could tell, wasn't telling her followers what to think or feel. When I watched it, that's not what I thought. I didn't agree with a lot of what she said, and I didn't also think that I had to believe what she was saying as fact. We all have our own agency and our own self, you know, we all have our our own minds, and you need to be able to think for yourself.
So again, she's setting the internet on fire because she's now saying that Donald Trump and the administrations of Israel and Trump have killed Charlie Kirk. Whether that's rooted in fact, or whether she that's rooted in her investigation, or whether that's rooted in the dream where she feels like Charlie said he was betrayed, I don't know. Candace's disillusionment with the current administration and what they're doing isn't, I think, is also pretty offensive to these people that are very diehard MAGA. And so any criticism of Trump, they also view as a betrayal. So that's probably another reason why they're so fixated on her. But for the same reason that you can tune in and tune out to anything, they can also choose to just not listen to her or follow her. They don't have to even hear what she says, but they do it because they're also getting engagement from it and it promotes their own worldview. So, every bit of outrage that they're expressing towards her also has incentive for them and their following. It's a very odd game, if you think about it. And I'm just in the rabbit hole watching this all play out and I'm going, "Well, that's weird."
So, what are your thoughts? Are you convinced that Candace is on to something? Or are you with these quote-unquote Zionists that she says are coming after her? And do you think that the punishment fits the crime? Or are they truly obsessed? Tell me in the comments below. Make sure to give this video a thumbs up. Make sure to subscribe to my channel if you haven't subscribed, and click the bell so you never miss a video. Thanks so much for watching. Bye, besties.