Elon Musk issued a statement after Don Lemon claimed that their partnership for his new digital show was canceled following a “tense” interview between the two about things like elections and SpaceX. In a post on X‚ the business account for the social media platform wrote‚ “X is a platform that champions free speech‚ and we’re proud to provide an open environment for diverse voices and perspectives.” “‘The Don Lemon Show’ is welcome to publish its content on X‚ without censorship‚ as we believe in providing a platform for creators to scale their work and connect with new communities‚” the statement added. “However‚ like any enterprise‚ we reserve the right to make decisions about our business partnerships‚ and after careful consideration‚ X decided not to enter into a commercial partnership with the show.” In a follow-up post‚ Musk himself made it clear that he found Lemon’s proposed new show was going to be basically just like his old show on “CNN‚ but on social media‚” which he said “doesn’t work‚ as evidenced by the fact that CNN is dying.” “And‚ instead of it being the real Don Lemon‚ it was really just Jeff Zucker talking through Don‚ so lacked authenticity‚” he added. “All this said‚ Lemon/Zucker are of course welcome to build their viewership on this platform along with everyone else.” It came after the fired CNN host posted a video on the platform and said that throughout his interview on Friday with Musk for his new show‚ he “kept reiterating to him — although it was tense at times — I thought it was good for people to see and hear our exchange. But‚ apparently‚ free-speech absolutism doesn’t apply when it comes to questions about him from people like me.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP “This does not change anything about the show‚ except for my relationship with Elon and X‚” he added. “There’s a whole lot that went down‚ and I’m going to tell you about it in the coming days.” In an earlier post‚ Lemon issued a statement about his show on X being canceled after Musk was the subject of an interview on the first episode of the disgraced host’s new show. News from me…#TheDonLemonShow pic.twitter.com/PzlKuvkZtj — Don Lemon (@donlemon) March 13‚ 2024 “We had a good conversation‚” Lemon wrote. “Clearly he felt differently. His commitment to a global town square where all questions can be asked and all ideas can be shared seems not to include questions of him from people like me.” Lemon also announced that the interview will be aired on Monday‚ March 18 when his new digital show is posted on YouTube‚ X‚ and any other place podcasts can be found. Related: Don Lemon Breaks Silence In First On-Camera Comments Since CNN Exit

Candace Owens questions the narrative on childhood vaccinations in her show‚ “A Shot in the Dark‚” where she discusses the medical establishment’s push to give children dozens of shots before they turn 18. In “A Shot in the Dark‚” Owens takes a non-political approach and uses mainstream sources to inform parents about vaccine ingredients‚ schedules‚ and the listed potential side effects while asking basic questions that she says doctors often ignore. The show is available for members on DailyWire+. “I am not going to try to convince you not to vaccinate your children‚” Owens said about her show. “That is not what I am being tasked with. It is not what is in my heart or soul to do. What I want to give you instead is information.” JOIN DAILYWIRE+ TO WATCH ‘A SHOT IN THE DARK’ Owens points out the conflicting claims regarding vaccine safety from the FDA and CDC‚ federal agencies that encourage parents to have vaccines administered to their newborns. Owens dives into the history of childhood vaccines‚ looking at how the number of vaccines and doses dramatically increased beginning in the mid-1980s after children first started receiving shots in the 1960s. She also questions the narrative that vaccines are making people healthier and shares her own traumatic story after receiving the Gardasil HPV vaccine. “The slur of calling somebody an anti-vaxxer has been tremendously effective throughout my lifetime‚ and I thought it was the crazy‚ crunchy people who wanted their children to die that didn’t vaccinate their children‚” Owens said. “But … your life experiences transform you. And I had a life experience that transformed me in the form of me being vax injured.” WATCH ‘A SHOT IN THE DARK’ ON DAILYWIRE+ In “A Shot in the Dark‚” the Daily Wire host reads through FDA inserts on vaccines that list ingredients and potential side effects‚ something Owens says doctors often fail to tell parents before injecting their children with vaccines. “I want to use CDC data‚” she said. “I want to take a look at the FDA inserts when I talk about what can happen if you give your child a vaccine. These are things that the pediatrician does not supply you with‚ which should be astounding to you.”

On Tuesday‚ I apparently blew up the Internet because I touched the political third rail. I talked about Social Security. Now I know what you’re thinking: What’s so spicy about Social Security? And I will admit I was thinking the same thing. Well‚ I said two things. First‚ I said that Social Security needs to change. We must raise the retirement age. Second‚ I said that as a general rule‚ it is not a good personal decision for people to retire early‚ unless we are talking about people who suffer a physical or mental malady as a result of continued work. Retirement‚ particularly in the post-familial‚ post-church age‚ harms mental health and robs people of purpose. That doesn’t mean you can’t retire if you want to — it’s a free country — or that you should be forced not to retire if you can afford to retire. It means that we should seriously consider what “retirement” itself means before we jump to the universal belief that retirement is always good. Let’s start with the first argument. There are a few simple facts of the matter with regard to Social Security. One‚ we don’t have the money for it: it’s a Ponzi scheme. We don’t have enough young people to pay for it‚ and life expectancy has increased. This means that by 2033‚ we will in fact be forced to cut benefits or raise taxes. There is no third option. This means that the government should not be paying people to phase into retirement at 62. And make no mistake‚ that’s what’s happening: Other taxpayers are paying for your Social Security. The money you paid in was stolen long ago. Which means that fewer and fewer workers — people generally poorer than those of retirement age — are paying for more and more retirees. What’s more‚ the average person who lives to 60 will live at least another couple of decades. If you wish to bankrupt the American economy‚ the continuation of Social Security as-is is guaranteed to do so. Every single politician knows this. And they all lie for political gain. Second‚ with regard to the personal decision to retire‚ very often when people retire‚ they’re making a bad decision. Not always‚ of course: There are people who are suffering from health problems who don’t want to continue working. That’s understandable. And if you want to retire on your own dime‚ because you’ve earned enough to retire‚ and you can find other forms of fulfillment aside from work‚ that’s certainly your prerogative. The point I was making is that many people who see retirement as a cure-all will be disappointed. Statistically‚ according to one study from the Institute of Economic Affairs‚ “while retirement may initially benefit health – by reducing stress and creating time for other activities‚ adverse effects increase the longer retirement goes on. It found retirement increases the chances of suffering from clinical depression by around 40%‚ and of having at least one diagnosed physical illness by 60%.” According to a meta-analysis of retirees‚ continuing to work prolonged life for those who worked beyond 65: “Healthy workers that continued to work until they were 66 had an 11% reduced mortality risk. Even retirees with health conditions that worked until they were 66 still had a 9% reduced mortality risk.” Yet another study from Social Science and Medicine finds that “those who had retired were 40 percent more likely to have had a heart attack or stroke than those who were still working.” WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show My point about retiring is simple: Work provides purpose and fulfillment for a huge number of people throughout their lives. That purpose and fulfillment does not automatically disappear at age 65. If we really believe that work is inherently degrading and joyless‚ what does an ideal retirement age look like? In that world‚ we should be looking to institute a universal basic income and get rid of work entirely. Which would‚ of course‚ be a truly awful idea. The vision of retirement we are constantly sold — sitting on a beach in a lounge chair — may not actually be real for many people. And what’s more‚ all people need a sense of purpose — from family‚ from community‚ from church. Our society has steadily removed all of those social institutions from daily life. The elderly no longer live in intergenerational homes‚ helping out kids and grandkids; they’re too often shuttled into old age homes‚ dependent on programs like Social Security. Which means a lot of people find that purpose in work. Retirement from work without getting involved in another job‚ or another community purpose‚ or in church is a recipe for personal malaise. Now‚ again‚ you can choose to retire. Nobody should force you to work; nobody is suggesting anything like that. But when it comes to government subsidization of retirement‚ we can’t afford it‚ and there’s little evidence that it’s good public policy. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP The solution‚ of course‚ is for you to keep your own money. We ought to phase out the Social Security system — if you’re close to 65‚ you can’t be left without a safety net‚ of course. But we need to move toward a system where you get to keep your own money‚ save and invest for the future. Politicians will continue to lie about this. But we should all understand that they are‚ in fact‚ lying.

President Joe Biden’s embattled son Hunter Biden is set to go on trial on three felony gun charges on June 3 — just 17 days prior to the start of his already-scheduled trial for nine tax charges in California. Delaware U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika ruled on Wednesday that the trial could start on June 3 despite the proximity of the dates‚ CNN reported‚ and both trials were scheduled in the aftermath of a failed plea agreement — which was initially supposed to include both the tax charges and the gun charges. In Delaware‚ the younger Biden faces three gun-related charges‚ including unlawfully purchasing a revolver while using illicit drugs‚ allegedly lying on federal forms about his drug use when he bought the weapon. Prosecutors say that Biden owned the firearm in question — a Colt Cobra 38SPL revolver that he purchased in October of 2018 — for approximately 11 days. Biden’s attorneys have filed a number of motions claiming that the plea agreement — which fell apart last summer — is still valid and covers the gun charges. Judge Noreika said during Wednesday’s status hearing that she has been “working through the motions‚” adding‚ “I haven’t completely figured out what I’m going to do with all of them.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP According to CNN’s report‚ both parties believe the gun trial could wrap up in under a week — with the prosecution taking several days and the defense another two days. Biden’s second trial is scheduled to begin on June 20‚ and covers nine tax-related charges amounting to what CNN referred to as “an alleged conspiracy across several years to avoid paying over $1 million in taxes.” The charges in both cases were brought by Special Counsel David Weiss‚ who was appointed in August of 2023 by Attorney General Merrick Garland‚ and charged with overseeing the investigation into Hunter Biden.

'We have many channels for passing messages'

'I don’t like bans on speech'

'Think of the worst stuff that someone could do to somebody as a sexual assault'

'A very different campaign'

'I initially thought it might be a gunshot'

Ridley will join Pollard and standout receivers DeAndre Hopkins and Treylon Burks