Candace Owens STUNS Piers Morgan in Explosive Clash Over Israel & Jewish Politics!

You're talking about power versus the people and you are always on the side of power first. You're on the side of the Israelis. It's so horrible. Oh, I'm going to pretend I don't see tens of thousands of Gazins dying. I've actually been very critical of the Israelis as you know where your bread is buttered. Everybody has the penis. Okay. It's very easy to present photos of 30 years of your life is at this exact same time last year, you were doing the same weird questioning and making all these things when I said that they were committing a holocaust against the Gazins and then you changed your mind. I'll see you next year when you change your mind again and we have more information about what happened and you realize that the difference between me and you is that I have the courage to take the risks and ask the questions first, okay, before it's popular. You know what this is? You're like, "What's going on? WHAT'S GOING ON? WHY DO YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY THESE planes were tracking Charlie?" Well, my theory is that we are being sold. >> In this video, a heated exchange unfolds as Candace Owens clashes with Piers Morgan on his show. The debate centers on her claims and questions surrounding a recent tragedy and broader geopolitical issues with Morgan challenging her credibility and accusing her of promoting unfounded conspiracy theories for attention and profit. Owen pushes back forcefully, arguing that mainstream media narratives deserve scrutiny and that difficult questions should not be dismissed outright. The conversation quickly escalates with both sides accusing the other of bias and bad faith. Owens defends her investigation into events connected to Turning Point USA and criticizes what she sees as selective outrage and media coverage. Morgan, in turn, questions her motives and comparisons are made to other controversial figures. The Kush becomes intense and personal, turning into a broader argument about media responsibility, free inquiry, and the line between investigation and speculation. idiots who don't have two eyes and who believe in magic bullet theory and who understand that Egyptian planes should not have been tracking Charlie even three times this year would be an anomaly. Okay, they've been tracking him. We don't know where it's going to end, but we are going to keep asking questions until we get clear answers. >> Candace, it may be that the person in the media spewing to the public is you. >> No, nice try. It's not. It's you by saying, "Why are you asking questions? DON'T YOU WORRY about Mikey's feelings. Everyone knows what this is. And like I said, because we have the example, the concrete example of after JFK's assassination, the media members quite literally being put on the payroll of the CIA, we have a historical example that we can look at and go, we're not doing that again. Doesn't matter how many times you keep telling the public that I'm spewing It is only because there has not been anything that has come out of this investigation that makes any sense that the public is not listening to, I am sorry to say this, peers, people like you. What I love about you and I sitting down is at this exact same time last year, you were doing the same weird questioning and making all these things when I said that they were committing a holocaust against the Gazins and then you changed your mind. I'll see you next year when you change your mind again and we have more information about what happened and you realize that the difference between me and you is that I have the courage to take the risks and ask the questions first, okay? Before it's popular. You wait until it becomes popular and then you change your mind. You may remember that one of your courageous moves was to repeatedly tell the world that Bridget Macron is a man. As you now know, as you now know, we had a $300,000 bet to charity about this because she's a woman. Yes, it's my view. >> She's not a woman. >> Well, we're going to find out is the point because it's going to court. They're suing you. And when she proves, as she will, that she's a woman, because it's very easy to prove, and you lose that case, then that she refuses for years. But then it will become more obvious to people that look, I think you're a brilliant operator at what you do and just seeing what can cause the most merry hell, therefore get you the biggest audience, therefore make you the most amount of money. And people have, as you know, you've been widely attacked now by a lot of people who say that you're just a ghoul, a vulture. You're doing this deliberately. You're inventing things or just flying ludicrous conspiracy theories to make money. Now, again, Candace, I don't I don't know. giving you celebrity. >> Can you not interrupt me? >> From Owen's perspective, being accused of chasing profit or attention shifts the debate away from substance and toward personal attacks. When a host questions a guest's integrity rather than focusing on the evidence being discussed, tensions are bound to rise. During the exchange, Owens responds by highlighting Morgan's own media history and accusing him of aligning with establishment narratives when convenient. The back and forth underscores a deeper disagreement about journalism itself. Whether it should reinforce official accounts or rigorously challenge them. As the discussion grows more confrontational, the tone reflects a broader cultural divide over trust in institutions, the role of independent commentators, and how far skepticism should go before it becomes harmful speculation. >> I do I do think the it's pretty rich. It's pretty rich coming from you is all I'm going to say. That's me putting it very nicely given your background, your career, your celebrity involvement, the D, you know, Princess Diana. Wrong messenger is what I'll say right off the top. Okay, wrong messenger. What you are mistaking uh or I guess we're not even mistaking because you know what this is. You're talking about power versus the people. And you are always on the side of power first. You're on the side of the Israelis. It's so horrible. Oh, I'm going to pretend I don't see tens of thousands of Gazins dying. That should be very critical of the Israelis where your bread is buttered. Everybody being very critical of the penis. Okay. It's very easy to present photos of 30 years of your life. Breit keeps teasing. Oh, I'm going to I'm wear I'm going to Breit. Nobody for a blood test. We asked you for some photos and you refused. Everybody knows that we're going to find out. Was not shot by Tyler Robinson on a rooftop. I am sorry that in this day and age there seems to be such a shortage of testosterone that a woman has to be the person that states the obvious. Right. I invite you to join me and I know that you will by the end of next year because they're not going to get away with what they did to my friend Charlie Kirk. And I am not going to change my mind least of all when I am being called names by someone who has quite a year a background and experience in doing things uh because it's lucrative and not always because it's sensitive. >> Sure. Listen, you can you can call me a hypocrite as much as you want. I don't care. It's fine. I'm just simply saying what other people have been saying about you. I didn't say I felt that. >> Thank you. I'll let you know what people are saying about you, too. I read it all like you. I read it all the time. But I would say that like I said at the start of this interview, I don't know whether any of the things you're saying are true or not. I just do know you're saying an a huge amount of stuff. It's making you very wealthy. You're getting millions and millions of people coming in. Which which by the way, >> what is this idea that it's making me very wealthy? Can you explain that slowly? >> Throughout the full interview, money and motives become recurring themes. Organ repeatedly questions whether Owens benefits financially from controversial content, while Owens maintains that her work is driven by what she sees as legitimate unanswered questions. The focus on revenue and audience growth raises a larger issue about modern media, where both traditional broadcasters and independent commentators operate within attention-driven ecosystems. Critics argue that financial incentives can shape narratives across the board, not just for one side. Supporters of Owens believe Morgan's emphasis on her earnings distracts from the issues she raises, while supporters of Morgan argue that examining incentives is part of responsible journalism. The exchange illustrates how quickly debates can shift from facts to character and intention. And the charge >> I'm asking you to explain that I'm explaining I'm explaining to you. How was he making money? >> I'm explaining I'm explaining to you the the the analogy which is there are as you know right now a lot of people from Tim to New York Post to others who've come out very stridently in the last week alone in the last week and say that's exactly what you've been doing with Erica Kirk. >> Yeah. But you haven't answered the question. So this is just made up. It's as I said this is just all fluff. You're suggesting that I'm making money. Did I sign a new advertiser? Are we meeting more? Are we reading more ads? Do we put this somewhere else? The more views you get on YouTube, the more money did I sell a t-shirt. Okay, but like come on Pierce money on YouTube. Are are you kidding me? I was already in a top 10 podcast globally before Charlie was assassinated. And if you think that I would want my friend to be assassinated so I could go from being in the top five to being number one, you're out of your mind. Okay. So disrespectful. But like the point is that nobody everyone who is saying that I'm making more money cannot say how I'm making more money cuz it's just not true. Okay. So you're like, "Oh, she got a bump in viewership talking about your YouTube numbers." Everyone in the world because it was a public assassination and then in the weeks following and it went back to normal. >> Candace, are your YouTube numbers up since you've been doing the Charlie Kirk investigations? >> What I am saying to you is that this is the exact same argument you guys had about Breijit. So it can't and then the same exact thought you were lying about the Blake Lively thing. Okay, but like what about the Blake Lively thing? So, you can't keep saying that, oh, she's always in the top 10 because she's talking about something or I'm just this is my podcast and it's me. It's just me. People enjoy my podcast because I don't treat them like they're idiots. I don't treat them like they should accept that Breit Cone just can't pres present one photo of herself raising her kids across 30 years. It's just too much to ask. Oh my gosh, it's ridiculous. How dare you? It's an intrusion of privacy. She'd rather file a transatlantic lawsuit than to just produce photos and put all of this to bed. That's the difference between you and I. So now there's this lie, this repeat lie from Camala Chronicles, which we did looking into Camala's background because it was relevant to the election cycle. Then we did the Blake uh Blake Lively lawsuit and they said, "Oh, she's trying to change her brand. That's the only reason her numbers are up." Then we went to Breijit, which I lost, by the way. Uh I had had to get a whole career change when I first covered that story. So jokes on me if I'm doing this to make money, but I was willing to be fired to tell the truth. And then it's all about Breijie. And now we've arrived at Charlie Kirk. I feel like there's something about that that actually is just people not being willing to admit that what people appreciate about me and why they keep coming back is that I'm willing to take risks to tell the truth. >> No, I think don't get me wrong, I think I was already sold out on ads at the end of the year because our podcast was was successful. I have not sold a t-shirt, nothing with his name on it. It's just >> by the end of the segment, the disagreement has moved beyond specific claims and into a broader confrontation over credibility and media power. Owens frames herself as challenging entrenched narratives and taking risks while portraying Morgan as defending official accounts. Morgan, for his part, positions himself is pushing back against what he sees as irresponsible or unproven allegations. The clash reflects larger attentions in today's media landscape where accusations of bias, gatekeeping, and misinformation flow in all directions. Whether viewers side with Owens's insistence on questioning dominant narratives or with more

A fiery debate erupts as Candace Owens and Piers Morgan go head-to-head over Israel and Jewish political issues. The intense exchange quickly gains traction online, with viewers divided over the arguments and the broader implications of the discussion. Disclaimer: This content is shared for commentary, criticism, and news reporting purposes under Fair Use (Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act). Portions of the referenced footage are credited to Piers Morgan Uncensored (Piers Morgan’s official YouTube channel). All rights remain with their respective owners.