Candace Owens – Down the Rabbit Hole
Fri 10:55 am +00:00, 19 Dec 2025 7
Source: https://mileswmathis.com/candowens.pdf
Photo at above link
December 17, 2025
Youtube is pushing the Jimmy Dore Show on me, which is a mistake, as you are about to see. They
never learn. They should allow me to watch nothing but kitten, otter, and red panda videos.
A couple of days ago Jimmy had on Candace Owens, as you see above, selling her idea the Israelis got
Charlie Kirk for some reason. Now, I am not a big defender of Israel and Netanyahoo, as you know. I
am the last person on Earth you would predict to be getting in the way of fire here. Except for one little
problem: I happen to know that NO ONE got Charlie Kirk, since that whole event was staged. My
paper on that has been leading all searches (except Google) since day one, with zero promotion, and I
would assume huge anti-promotion. So I can see through Candace like she is made of thinnest glass.
Her orders are to confirm the reality of the event in any way possible, while appearing to remain
conservative and cutting edge, and appearing to question the mainstream story of the event. In a word,
she is controlling the opposition, agreeing the event is fishy but nonetheless selling it as real. As I have
shown you with the JFK story and many others, the governors don’t really care who you think did it, as
long as you think it was done. The one thing you CANNOT do is question whether it happened at all.
So Candace dutifully points the finger at Netanyahoo and he even plays along, both of them actors in
the larger stageplay here. Bibi doesn’t mind playing the bad guy here, he was already playing that part
in the Israel/Palestine war, so what’s the diff? It is all about stirring your mind, taking your taxes for
their manufactured and mostly fake wars, and keeping you divided on all possible issues. They need
you split in as many ways as they can, to keep your eyes on one another and off them. In fact, they are
testing you with that video of Candace, to see how little you see.
Do you see what I see? I bet you don’t. It is hiding in plain sight.
OK, Sherlock, you are back. I have given you as long as you like to study the photo above under title,
or even to go to the video and scan that if you like. Maybe some motion will jog your brain awake.
What’s that on her hat? The emblem on her hat. She’s wearing a CIA gimme cap, isn’t she? Why
would Candace Owens be wearing a CIA gimme cap for this interview? Do you commonly wear a
CIA gimme cap around the house? Does anyone do that?
Has Candace ever worked for the CIA? Not according to her official bio. But I remind you she
worked as a director of TPUSA from 2017-2019, so according to me she DID work for the CIA, since
TPUSA was always a CIA front. So the way I see it, Candace is just admitting what I already know:
SHE IS WEARING A CIA GIMME CAP FOR THE BEST OF REASONS—SHE IS A CIA AGENT.
Do you see how that works?
So Candace just outed herself, I suppose on purpose, though I can’t tell you why. I guess they figured
this was the only way they could get more in-your-face.
on that. Wow. The logo is indistinguishable from CIA, so the riffing fails miserably. The opposite of
funny. It reminds me of The Onion trying to hide the truth behind a joke, but just giving themselves
away. The Onion crashed and burned several years ago, and Candace is following here. ]
That is also why she has been mirroring me and flanking me for the past year or more: she has been
assigned the job of spinning you off me. So she agrees with me on some things—some of the Jewish
questions, for instance—then spins you off the others, either by ignoring them or trying to give you
something sexier to bite on. She and Jimmy Dore are desperately trying to get your eyes off my paper
on Kirk.
Candace makes another glaring error at about minute 5, and you can tell she recognizes it immediately,
since she looks sideways at herself, but keeps going. She says,
Operation Mockingbird was saying this was completely untrue, Charlie never thought about Catholicism,
he was a Judeo-Christian to the day he died, an evangelical . . . whatever it is . . .
What? First of all, Catholics are also Christians, last time I checked, so this makes no sense. And she
worked for Kirk and Turning Point, so I think she should know what an evangelical is. Why would she
say “evangelical . . . whatever it is”, like she doesn’t know what term to use? Very weird, you have to
admit. But the weirdest thing is calling Kirk a Judeo-Christian. Not a Christian, but a Judeo-Christian.
Which literally means a Christian OR a Jew. So according to Candace here, Charlie was either a
Christian OR a Jew. She isn’t sure.
Which of course would confirm my analysis that he is in fact a Jew pretending to be a Christian. Like
many other famous people. Like Candace.
After that, she says “there was a conspiracy here”, and suddenly the interview is cut [min 5:30], with
something having been badly edited out. The screen actually goes to black. Again, very weird, but I
would guess she said something even weirder than what she just said and they had to clip it. Once you
make a mistake like that, you tend to get flustered and make a string of them.
That’s when I noticed some other strange things in the background in Candace’s office. The camera
setting is blurring the background, so I can’t identify them for sure, but maybe my readers will help us
here. There is that gold thing next to her head to your left, and then that thing to the far right that at
first I thought was a lamp, but once Jimmy’s logo moves, you can see it isn’t a lamp, but some sort of
religious emblem. They could be Christian, in which case they fit, but given the CIA cap she is
wearing, they could also be tests to see how blind we are, like the cap. They could be Jewish, in which
case they would be more clues hiding in plain sight. It is at least worth asking what they are, especially
the gold one which is positioned right near her head in frame, as if it was placed there as marker for
those who know how to read it. I can tell you I don’t have anything like that in my house, on my desk,
or on my bookshelves.
OK, I paused and did a search on “Jewish reliquary”, just for fun. As far as Jewish objects go, I know
about menoras and dreidels, but then I am out. Amazingly, I did find some things that resemble that
gold thing, since it looks like a cathedral or tabernacle of some sort to me. As it turns out, so does the
other thing to the right. It appears they are both reliquaries, but are they Jewish or Christian? You will
say that is easy, since Jews don’t have reliquaries like that. And since the reliquary to the right looks
like a cross, that would seem to be final. But you have to admit it still seems strange that Candace
would have these reliquaries on the bookshelves behind her. Is she really that religious? I have never
gotten that feeling from her. With more digging, I discovered she had allegedly converted from
Evangelical to Catholic in 2024, to join her husband’s alleged faith. So the answer to my question
would appear to be she has those Catholic reliquaries in frame in her interview to back up that story of
her Catholic conversion, which is kind of strange. Stranger still? According to her Wiki page, she was
baptized in the Brompton Oratory in London at that time. You only need to be baptized once, so I read
that to mean she was NOT baptized until 2024, at age 35. Otherwise you would just expect her to be
confirmed as a Catholic, in a confirmation ceremony. And if she was not baptized all those years as an
Evangelical, working for Turning Point, that not only begs the question of how that can be, but it tends
to confirm my analysis of all this, doesn’t it?
By the way, I remind you Candace’s husband is Parler CEO George Farmer, son of the billionaire
Baron Michael Farmer, former head of Metal and Commodity Ltd, a subsidiary of the gigantic
Metallgesellschaft AG, world’s largest trader of metals like copper and nickel. He sold that to Enron
in 2000 for about half a billion before they went under. He is scrubbed at thepeerage.com, and they are
hiding his ancestry for some reason. No parents listed. Wiki also mostly scrubs the Baron Farmer,
hiding his mother and telling us the father died when he was four, back in 1948. We are not told if
George is the oldest son and therefore set to become the next Baron Farmer. In either case, this is the
big money behind Candace now, though there was big money behind her even before she married
Farmer in 2019. I also remind you that these rich people are not your friends, whether they are
pretending to be red or blue, Catholic or Protestant, pro or anti-Zionist. So don’t be fooled by them, no
matter how pretty they are. Especially when they are wearing CIA gimme caps.
Next, Candace says her fight is against Zionists, because they want the ghost of Charlie Kirk: they say
“this is our ghost and we need to direct it so there is energy behind Zionism and Israel.”
Again, what? Why would Zionists want the ghost of Charlie Kirk? Isn’t this the guy the ADL raged
against as an anti-Semite? Well, yes, but he is also the guy who was funded by Bernie Marcus. He is
also the guy who said
“I have a bulletproof resumé showing my defense of Israel … I believe in the scriptural land rights
given to Israel. I believe in fulfilment of prophecy”, and added that he would “fight for” Israel.
[212] Kirk often repeated pro-Israeli talking points about the Gaza war.[212] He blamed Hamas for
the deaths of civilians in Gaza,[212] and denied that Israel is starving Palestinians.[126] Kirk said of
Palestine, “I don’t think the place exists.”[213] Kirk backed Republican crackdowns on the 2024
pro-Palestinian protests on university campuses and activist deportations in the second Trump
presidency. [126][193] Several Israeli government ministers, politicians, and political activists
mourned Kirk’s death, with many describing him as a “friend of Israel” and a few linking his killing
to anti-Zionists.[207] Netanyahu said he had recently invited Kirk to Israel, while Morton Klein said
Kirk had recently accepted an invitation to speak at the Zionist Organization of America’s national
gala.[126]
And all that being true, why would Candace, who—like Tucker Carlson—read a eulogy for Kirk, now
be accusing Netanyahoo of ordering his death? None of this makes any sense.
But as crazy as it all is, I can say it isn’t any crazier than the Kirk storyline before he faked his death,
which was all over the place in the same way, being pro-Israel one minute and anti-Israel the next. It
was always a colossal mindstir, obviously manufactured to create schism and keep everyone confused
and off-balance, like the greater Israel storyline, and indeed the greater Modern storyline as a whole,
which a chorus of angels couldn’t unwind. I am reminded of the Chomsky-Dershowitz debates, which
were a similar mindstir, but in this case Charlie played both sides. Cheaper that way, I guess.
As if this wasn’t all crazy enough, Jimmy Dore now brings Charlie on in this Candace interview at
minute 6:30 to talk about. . . the JFK assassination! What? We see footage of Charlie saying LBJ and
the Cubans probably got JFK—I guess because those theories had lost some momentum in the past 50
years, as the CIA and Russia took more of the blame. But they need to keep all the kettles boiling, for
maximum confusion.
Amusingly, Charlie also makes a mistake here, saying “the more important question is not WHO DID
IT? We have to acknowledge that more than one person did it”. He shouldn’t have put it like that to
start with, since his first sentence is true. Even one true sentence is dangerous. The important question
is not who did it. The important question is, WAS IT DONE AT ALL? Two true sentences in a row,
which is fatal. But Charlie spins you off that realization immediately with the go-to feint: more than
one person did it. Because once you start weighing persons against persons, you are past the first
question, never looking back. You have been fooled into assuming it was done.
So why did Jimmy Dore run that clip of Charlie? Because, he says, it is the same with Kirk: more than
one person was involved. In other words, Jimmy and Candace need to get you past that first question
as fast as possible: WAS IT DONE AT ALL? They want you to forget that should be the first question
of any event. But they have assumed it was done, and they want you arguing about who done it. If you
are arguing about whether it was Robinson or Israel or CIA or Pauly Shore, you have just relegated my
entire long paper to oblivion. You don’t have to respond to any of my analysis, because of course it
happened. It was reported and we have some CGI video, so time to start pointing fingers at Israel and
China and Russia and Venezuela and Menudo and Danny Bonaduce.
While digging on that reliquary question, I ended up on Candace’s Wiki page, which is the usual CIA
mess. They claim that she was hired by a private equity firm in Manhattan at age 22 with no degree,
rising within two years to be a vice president of administration by age 24. Really? How does that
work? Not finding that cushy enough, she became CEO of Degree180 (note the aces and eights) at age
25, I guess quitting her other job. This was allegedly a marketing agency that included a blog written
by Owens. She launched another website in 2016, SocialAutopsy.com, which looks like another CIA
front. There she became a conservative “overnight”, and began working with spooks Milo
Yianoppoulos and Mike Cernovich. Soon she was used by both Trump and Kirk to prove Turning
Point and the Republicans weren’t racist. From there she moved on to PragerU and DailyWire, both
run by Jews. So she didn’t have any problem with Jews then. She has only been on this current
assignment since leaving Ben Schapiro in 2024, so she must have been reassigned for some reason.
There was not enough infighting in 2024, you know, so she was required to create more. As soon as
Trump won, the script had to be flipped again, to crush him and MAGA and keep citizens on both sides
of the fence utterly demoralized, hopeless, and powerless.
You may not know—I didn’t until today—that Candace has admitted she is not a round-Earther.
Meaning she doesn’t believe the Earth is a sphere. That’s Project Chaos.
In July 2024, Owens suggested that Ashkenazi Jews trace their origin to Khazars and are not
related to “biblical Jews”.
So if you thought she was agreeing with me, you would be wrong. That’s also Project Chaos. I have
proven that is Jewish propaganda itself, since they want to muddy the waters to such an extent you can’t
tell up from down. On the one hand, they tell us Ashkenazi are not really Jews, and on the other hand
they tell us Sephardic Jews are not really Jews (see the book When Scotland was Jewish), also being
later converts. If almost no living Jews are really Jews, then who do you blame? It all becomes mist.
Which is why I don’t deal into their games, calling the current ruling class Phoenicians instead. That
way they can’t dodge you with these name games. Whatever their ancient history, they are criminals,
and we know their lineages for many centuries, linking them to previous criminals, so it doesn’t really
matter what Biblical line they come from. In fact, they come from the line of Solomon and David,
being in-laws of Hiram of Tyre, so they are both Jews and Phoenicians. Not that it matters. They
would be just as guilty if they were Eskimos.
I just pick from people like Candace Owens the bits that interest me. Her exposé of Brigitte Macron was excellent and confirmed a lot of the material that has been sloshing round for years.
Charlie Kirk doesn’t interest me in the slightest, so I wouldn’t be bothered to look into any of this. Someone has gone to a great deal of trouble, but it’s a big yawn from me.
Fair comment Belyi, Candace certainly made the Brigitte story more well known. But still, it all has the feel of an authorised psyop to me. Macrons filed a US case in July 2025 but the date of any hearing is not yet scheduled. The Macrons misdemeanours are far bigger than her tranny status. He worked directly for Rothschild and was parachuted into the French Presidency via a “new” party. I couldn’t believe how the French were so easily suckered into voting for him. Aren’t they supposed to be a rebellious nation? The tranny story feels like a big distraction, there is FAR more dirt than just that
See Starmer and his arsonist rent boys too. Case scheduled for next April. Why wait so long? Will he even be PM by that date?
As for Kirk then I see your point. His “death” got masses of coverage but was exposed as a charade very quickly. So who cares?
It’s has been interesting to see who promotes the Kirk baloney. Some good sites are in on it. Including Makow. Are they stupid? Or on the payroll?
Sex and death are always big sellers for some reason. A measure of how low we’ve fallen as a society?
You have to look at the long Sarkozy/Hollande story to see why the French were happy with someone who promised a different route, although as some of us pointed out to French colleagues, Macron was a Rothschild protégé and this could turn out badly, which it has.
I was wondering when the rent boy affair was coming out and had assumed that it had been covered up and ‘forgotten’. Glad to know it’s still on.
I suppose that Micron looked good against his predecessors. But his bio was freely available and there were not many dots to connect
Then there was his opponent. Marine Le Pen if I recall. Rather like Starmer up against the wet lettuce Sunak, a weak opponent fielded to shoo him in
The Sarkozy/Hollande sagas were both based on shenanigans with women (how French), especially Hollande in the last months of his mandate. Perhaps people thought that a ‘happily married’ man like Manu would at least avoid that.
I also read that Le Pen accepted 3m Euros to stand aside as she had definitely won the presidency, but that may just be gossip.
On second thoughts, I wonder if the rent boy trial is being held in April because it is part of the programme to get rid of Starmer. His shelf-life would fit in nicely with that. I imagine we can say that he will disappear then, if not before.
I expect so Belyi, it fits