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 “confirmation bias”. I’m 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 once— meeting him ahead of our interview. Keep in mind my interview where we discussed Peter Thiel was dropped the very same week she’s claiming she was not allowed to utter his name. So what actually happened? My honest take is that if anyone questions Leah’s 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 didn’t 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 podcast—because 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 app— 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 Shawn’s 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 doesn’t fear introspection and as always, I have nothing to hide.

Sounds like asking a simple question to grok really struck a nerve. 😂 Bitch it’s relevant whether you like it or not. You have a financial incentive to support Candace.

They deleted their post 🫣