The SSRI wine aunts are pouring their support upon the unworthy Lindsay Clancy, who has pleaded not guilty by reason of temporary insanity to the murder of her 3 children. Not to be left out of the conversation is Candace Owens.
As previously summarized on Evangelical Dark Web:
Clancy knew what she was doing. The timeline shows calculation. She chose the moment her husband was gone. She performed a self-harm that would not kill her. She hung from the window and dropped, shaving five feet off what should have been a pedestrian twelve-to-fourteen-foot leap from a second-story window. What was intended to produce a broken leg or ankle, even a concussion, ended instead in a broken nervous system. The plan failed when the fall left her paralyzed rather than merely wounded. That does not transform the murders into something less than murder. It transforms the defense into a calculated second act.
There is an actual conspiracy theory to be had here: Lindsay Clancy embellished mental deterioration with journal entries and faked an attempted suicide with the intent to get off on the insanity plea.
But Candace Owens prefers true crime slop to a criminal conspiracy.
Candace Owens: "Lindsay Clancy is obviously not guilty." pic.twitter.com/52NCu91pLf
— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) August 20, 2026
The facts that Clancy is the one who murdered her own children is not even disputed by the defense. Although the defense would have an easier time on insanity plea because it unduly raises the threshold for a criminal conviction to not only be beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond a reasonable doubt that the person was not temporarily insane while committing the act than they would without it.
But Candace Owens blames the nefarious Big Pharma. And while pharmaceuticals played a role, Clancy shopped for doctors and played the broken system. She had a supportive husband and went to doctors.
But no amount of drugs should make someone not guilty of a crime or make drunken vehicular homicide excusable.Â
The Tyler Robinson Grift
Candace Owens has painted herself into a corner with conspiracy slop. She claims to have been supportive of Lindsay Clancy from day one, from 2023. However, there is no public comment from her on this case until August 20, 2026. This trial has been ongoing for a while also, as I had been keeping tabs on it. So her claim to have held the same conviction for years appears unfounded, thus disingenuous.
Candace Owens has peaked in popularity, peddling conspiracies about the death of Charlie Kirk. In a debate with Andrew Wilson, she offered zero evidence, not even bad evidence, to defend her position that Robinson was a patsy with Israel and France involved.
Even if a person sincerely believes that Tyler Robinson was not the murderer of Charlie Kirk, Candace Owens absolving Lindsay Clancy discredits her entire defense of Tyler Robinson. It chooses sisterhood over virtue and the interests of justice. It paints Owens not as a genuine believer but as a caricature.
Owens defending Clancy was predictable not because of any similarity in the case or a preponderance of the evidence, but because they are both high-profile. Her audience expects her to disagree with the “official narrative” and shows up to hear it. Perhaps Candace Owens is a slave to the grift of defending the indefensible because of subjective feelings and vibes. There are people who genuinely believe that Tyler Robinson is innocent, but the inability of Candace Owens to plead his case indicates that she is not one of them.
