Candace Owens Blindsided With Devastating News

Candace Owens Blindsided With Devastating News

The Daily Wire unexpectedly obtained a gag order against its former anchor, Candace Owens, during public negotiations between Owens and Ben Shapiro regarding a debate on Israel and antisemitism.

The story was initially broken by journalist Glenn Greenwald, a Pulitzer Prize winner.

Renowned for her outspoken nature, Candace Owens resigned from the Daily Wire in March due to differences in opinion regarding her views on Israel's actions in Gaza, which she labeled as "genocidal," and the U.S. government's support for the country.

These incidents set the stage for an anticipated heated public debate between Daily Wire co-founder and staunch pro-Israel advocate Shapiro and Owens.

The public eagerly anticipated the debate, and initially, all parties were open to a candid discussion on such a divisive topic. Shapiro even proposed broadcasting the debate on his program without a moderator.

However, Owens suggested having well-known individuals like Joe Rogan or Lex Fridman moderate to ensure an impartial platform. Despite these negotiations, the debate never materialized.

Behind the scenes, the Daily Wire took legal steps to prevent Owens from making any public statements deemed disparaging toward the company or Shapiro. The gag order was sought through a private arbitrator, as detailed by Greenwald, who stated that Owens' public call for a debate and her social media activities were seen as disparaging. The arbitrator sided with the Daily Wire and imposed the gag order, effectively delaying any plans for the discussion.

As Glenn Greenwald put it:

But the debate was never going to happen. That is because the Daily Wire — in secret and unbeknownst to its readers — sought a gag order to be placed on Owens after she had called for a debate. They did this under the cover of secrecy, before a private arbitrator, at exactly the same time that they were claiming in public that they wanted this debate and were even negotiating the terms with her. To this date, the Daily Wire has not informed its readers, seeking to understand why the much-anticipated debate had not yet happened, that they had sought and obtained a gag order against Owens.

When seeking a gag order to be imposed on Owens, the Daily Wire accused her of violating the non-disparagement clause of her agreement with the company. To substantiate this accusation, the company specifically cited Owens’ initial tweet requesting a debate with Shapiro as proof of this disparagement, along with concerns she voiced that Shapiro appeared to be violating the confidentiality agreement between them by publicly maligning Owens’s views to explain her departure from the company. While the company claimed before the arbitrator that it did not object in principle to a “healthy debate,” it urged the imposition of gag order on Owens by claiming that the way she requested the debate constituted disparagement of Shapiro and the site.

The Daily Wire's request for the gag order against Owens alleged that she had violated the non-disparagement clause in her contract. The company reinforced its argument by citing various complaints against both the Daily Wire and Shapiro, which Owens had encouraged by engaging with the posts.

In response to a request for comment on Greenwald's article, Owens remarked, "I wish I could comment on this but I can't." She added, "Can neither confirm nor deny."

Boreing, a representative for the Daily Wire, countered Greenwald's piece, stating, "Your story is inaccurate to the point of being false," without specifying any particular inaccuracies. He did not refute the claim that the Daily Wire had obtained a gag order against Owens while simultaneously expressing a desire for a debate. Boreing mentioned, "I'm sure you can appreciate how fraught a high-profile break-up like this is. For that reason, we are trying to resolve our issues with Candace privately."

Subscribe to Conservative Patriots

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe