Darrin quits.
Why?
Bad treatment.
Why?
Leah.
Why?
Israel ties.
Bigger pictures are for bigger people.
Debunktivism retweeted
What a wonderfully convenient double standard @dailyfreddo . Had Candace done precisely the same thing, I suspect youâd all be drafting her Pulitzer nomination rather than questioning her ethics.
As for your dislike of Leah, it seems less like a conclusion reached through independent analysis and more like a software update issued from headquarters. Candace disapproves, and suddenly her disciples have all developed remarkably identical objections. What an extraordinary coincidence. đ¤
Of course, youâre perfectly entitled to your biases. But letâs call your channel what it is: A dedicated SHRINE to your Supreme Leader Candace Owens, complete with a subscribe button and the occasional performance of âindependentâ thought and âobjectivityâ.
To be fair, Candace did once say sheâd only run for president if she could be a dictator. Judging by her disciples, sheâs already halfway there. No elections, no opposition, and certainly no independent thought. Just an army of self-proclaimed âfree thinkersâ and âtruth-seekersâ who somehow all receive their opinions from the same headquarters.
For those of us fortunate enough to remain immune to the Candy Spell, the irony is exquisite: a movement devoted to QUESTIONING everything, EXCEPT the woman telling them what to question.
So about that phonecall audio released last night...
youtu.be/yjdLgfQYSJ4
Debunktivism retweeted
Everything is a psyop to encourage debauchery, chaos, and of course, division. We are in a psychological war and have been all our lives. Think accordingly.
Replying to @DailyLoud
Rappers and entertainer are CIA operates. 900k could address so many different social issues in America, especially the black community, but entertainers arenât allowed to use their wealth and influence for positivity. Theyâre paid to influence debauchery. The average stripper will never see any type of real wealth, but somewhere some girl right now is looking at this and decided sheâll become a stripper to possibly meet Drake and make alot of money.
Debunktivism retweeted
For some reason, John Mappin thought it was a good idea to make his Christmas video in a reptilian mask.
Look at this drawing.
John Mappin's longtime Camelot Castle business partner, artist Ted Stourton, has a rather interesting family history.
His full name is Edward Richard Plantagenet Corbally Stourton, a descendant of the aristocratic Stourton family, holders of the historic Mowbray, Segrave and Stourton baronies.
His fourth-great-grandfather, Charles Philip Stourton, 17th Baron Stourton, was a member of London's Royal Lodge of Freemasons, serving as Junior Warden from 1783 to 1785.
His father, William Stourton, 16th Baron Stourton, was identified in the Royal Lodge's historical minutes as the "Late Grand Master of Germany."
Another family connection through marriage, Robert Edward Petre, 9th Baron Petre, served as Grand Master of the English Freemasons from 1772 to 1777.
This is documented in the genealogy and in historical publications written by Freemasons themselves.
Debunktivism retweeted
You're all fake and gay. @RealCandaceO @JohnMappin
Debunktivism retweeted
Thanks again @leahfiles for bringing us more truth!!
It happened!
The audio confirms.
Looking forward to see how are you going to spin this one, you hag!
@RealCandaceO
Replying to @BEmpress1984
Not only did it never happen, but when I asked Leah for information to verify that claim specifically, that she was asked not to name Peter Thiel, she accused me of focusing in on Peter Thiel out of âconfirmation biasâ.
Iâm not sure she knows what confirmation bias means.
She then did a 3am X space SEVERELY misrepresenting our private DM conversation, because she was upset I told her there were obvious errors in her glacier app substack. She called me an ai bot and an idiot for trying to explain to her that some of the stuff she is suggesting is conspiracy is literal federal law compliance.
I normally never share private DMs, but since she completely misrepresented what I said to her privately and then publicly called me a shill, I will share the below. I have since given her my explicit permission to drop the entirety of our conversation because I have nothing to hide. I had dinner with Shawn Ryan onceâ meeting him ahead of our interview. Keep in mind my interview where we discussed Peter Thiel was dropped the very same week sheâs claiming she was not allowed to utter his name.
So what actually happened? My honest take is that if anyone questions Leahâs credentials or research she flies off the handle and tries to take them down with shoddy AI research presented as a deep dive.
From having looked into matter (by contacting a person who Leah told me would back up her claims and was present) I am confident stating that she misrepresented what happened.
It seems that after receiving producer notes, Shawn genuinely thought her research was dogshit. The producer then went and tried to politely and awkwardly see if he could find something of more interest for her to talk about beyond what anyone could easily find on google. In doing this, Leah genuinely believed that she was being censored because her research was SO controversial. It was the exact opposite.
What then transpired was effectively a really bad and awkward first date. Shawn was upset she was booked at all and that no one had done their due diligence enough to have prevented the occurrence of seating someone before him who claimed to be an economist with backgrounds in finance and accounting, but didnât know what the petrodollar was.
A decision was made to shelve the interview. Shawn then made (in my opinion) a bad decision to refer to the shelved interview on another podcastâbecause even though the public did not to whom he was referring to, Leah did and she got angry. Out of that anger, she concocted a narrative, (again with publicly available information on LinkedIn), that she was actually censored because he was protecting his assets with Peter Thiel and Andreeson Horowitz, names that she knew would easily trigger the conspiracy crowd into believing the deep state was after her research.
Next came her targeting the glacier appâ with more pithy, scraped research meant to make people think Shawn was colluding with the NSA and the Mossad to steal their data. Again, an easy sell with the conspiracy crowd, especially given Shawnâs background with the CIA.
All of this said, I would be happy to join Leah on her own podcast to explain to her more thoroughly why her substack research is tremendously flawed and at points, wholly dishonest. Truth doesnât fear introspection and as always, I have nothing to hide.
Debunktivism retweeted
Hereâs the completely unedited recording of Leahâs phone call with Shawn Ryanâs editor, Darrin.
The only changes made to the earlier version were removing background noise and boosting Darrinâs audio, which was too low.
Debunktivism retweeted
Replying to @KnoxieLuv
I reported this 2 months ago and got torn apart for it. The Venezuela oil fund is corrupt AF. Check it out if you havenât! Should be a few vids down here đđť
Ex follower of both.
The only obvious thing to me was their panic, the vile gaslight and arrogance, as both(and many others) struggled to come up with something reasonable, on Day 2-3.
Baron- The backlash are 80% bots
Candace -A Vegas/Israeli cartel op, in debt.
Pathetic! đ¤Ą
Is it obvious yet? Leah was an op explicitly for the purpose of attacking Candace Owens and Baron Coleman as Baron was transitioning to fill in for Candace.
Stew is leading the charge.
It's been their intent from day one.
9
Debunktivism retweeted
You truly couldnât find a bigger Village Idiot on X than @Villgecrazylady đ¤Şđ¤Ż
So now Mel is trying to shill for Sarah Adamâs who now works for Daily Wire and @RealCandaceO sworn enemies đ¤Żđ¤Ż WTAF? Anyone who followed Candace at all knows this is fucking insane! Theyâre OPSâźď¸
An updated estimation, including replies to other people's posts:
@Villgecrazylady
Even grok lost count. The margins are insane.
80-150+ times!!!đ¤Śââď¸
This woman is insane. In the past 24 hours she replied to people, regarding Leah, over 20 times.
Truly obsessed. Broken.
Yet replying to Sam, she is also denying "posting about her".
WTAF? Zero self-awareness. Embarrassing!
@Villgecrazylady @leahfiles
No, that was actually Part 1 of 2 of Part 4. (You're gonna wrap your head on this)
Part 1 was Shawn muzzling Leah
Part 2 was Shawn slandering Leah on The Diary.
Part 3 was Leah reaching out to them.
Part 4 was Leah's 2 parts post.
@Villgecrazylady
Debunktivism retweeted
11 Democrats didn't show up to vote to impeach Hegseth. wtf do we pay you for? literally
Debunktivism retweeted
Replying to @Villgecrazylady
Look into that then. Nobody is arguing that SR, or any employer, shouldnât be mad if they believe an employee betrayed their trust.
But that wasnât the beginning. This whole thing started with Leahâs claims that SR told her not to name names.
Which was a true statement.
Debunktivism retweeted
Also no coincidences sheâs defended Russel Brand, Harvey Weinstein, the Tate brothers and has her own Romanian links. How many times was Mapping mentioned in Epstein Black Book again? đ¤ Remind me @grok
You call attacks attention.
You frame a public drag as "gained attention" and "she became involved"
Financial fraud investigations matter and she keeps doing that.
This is highly manipulative of you.
We see you!
Replying to @dailyfreddo
IN MY OPINION AS LONG AS WE ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE ONEâŚLeah went from being an unknown to becoming the center of a very public feud involving Candace Owens, Shawn Ryan, and several YouTube commentators.
And much of the attention now seems to revolve around Leah herself rather than the subjects she originally claimed to be investigating.
That's the part I find most revealing:
She gained attention through controversial investigative claims.
Her credentials and research methods came under scrutiny.
She became involved in personal disputes with other commentators.
Those disputes generated even more coverage and publicity.
That certainly creates the appearance of someone stirring the pot. Can we go back to actual substantial investigations that truly matter?
1
33




























