Louder with Crowder: Vanity Fair's Susie Wiles Hit Piece—Who’s To Blame? PLUS Special Guest Jillian Michaels

Date: December 17, 2025
Host: Steven Crowder
Guest: Jillian Michaels

Episode Overview

This episode dissected a recent Vanity Fair article, described by Crowder as a "hit piece" on Susie Wiles (Trump's Chief of Staff) and the state of conservative media coverage. The episode also featured an extended, substantive interview with fitness icon and podcaster Jillian Michaels, focusing on the boundaries of political discourse on the right, platforming controversial figures (specifically Nick Fuentes), and the role of disavowal in US politics. The show had sharp, sometimes pointed debate but maintained an undercurrent of mutual respect.

Key Segments and Timestamps

• [01:34] Show kicks off: Christmas special preview, episode goals
• [06:26] Banter, updates, and Crowder’s philosophy on confronting critics
• [11:08] Commentary on dehumanizing political opponents and the Susie Wiles Vanity Fair article
• [12:09] Fact-checking Vanity Fair: Media malpractice, rapid-fire claims
• [33:27] Introduction to the Jillian Michaels segment and context for her recent remarks
• [35:19] Crowder–Michaels interview: Disavowals, platforming, Nick Fuentes, race, gender roles, social media litmus tests
• [126:10] Bonus: Jillian Michaels on fitness, health fundamentals, and cultural psyops
• [138:35] Closing reflections and mutual respect, plans for future collaboration

Fact-Checking the Vanity Fair “Hit Piece”

([12:09]-[33:27])

Crowder walks through what he calls ‘media malpractice’ in the VF article:

• Claim 1: “Nine people died on January 6th.”

  • Crowder debunks this, stating only Ashley Babbitt was killed at the Capitol; others died from unrelated causes (e.g., strokes, suicides).
  • Crowder [14:12]: “That nine includes strokes, overdoses, suicides... months after and have no relation to January 6th.”

• Claim 2: Trump has an “alcoholic’s personality.”

  • Crowder reads additional context: Wiles’ comments were meant as a compliment (Trump’s drive and confidence), not an accusation of drinking.
  • Crowder [17:27]: “As a matter. Here’s how you know it’s true. No one’s ever attacked him for being an alcoholic... the opposite. They’re deliberately lying to you.”

• Claim 3: Charlie Kirk’s assassination compared to the Reichstag Fire.

  • Crowder lampoons Vanity Fair for invoking Nazi analogies, arguing these comparisons fuel political extremism rather than heal divides.
  • Crowder [18:43]: “Unless they’re implying that President Trump killed Charlie Kirk, it couldn’t be less apt of a comparison.”

• Claim 4: ICE arrested 170 Americans.

  • Explains most were arrested for assaulting ICE officers or were merely detained and released.
  • Crowder [19:08]: “These were criminals who were committing assault and battery on ICE, or they were brought in for questioning, they were detained, and they were released.”

• Claim 5: Trump wants regime change in Venezuela, “it’s not about drugs.”

  • Crowder frames this as positive: busting drug boats, potentially regime change as a side-effect.
  • Crowder [20:19]: “The president believes in harsh penalties for drug dealers, as he said many, many, many times. These are not fishing boats...”

• Other Claims:

  • Trump in Epstein files — only because he worked with authorities, not for wrongdoing.
  • Elon Musk as “a ketamine fiend” — Crowder finds this at least partly believable.
  • Media bias of reporter Chris Whipple, including unflattering image choices for conservative women.

The Crowder–Jillian Michaels Interview

([33:27]-[139:38])

Setting the Table: Why Jillian is On

• Michaels recently warned Don Jr. that the right risks losing moderates if they don't “disavow” figures like Nick Fuentes. Crowder disagrees with the premise of disavowal and wants an honest, “charitable,” discussion.
• Michaels clarifies accusations misattributed to her (“white nationalist”, anti-Semitism, etc.), debunking the smears and describing her background.
  • Michaels [36:45]: “No, I am not a white nationalist.”
  • Michaels [36:56]: “I have one grandparent who was a Russian Jew... and I do not hate the Jews.”

Disavowal, Platforming, and Dangerous Ideas

The Heart of the Debate ([38:48]-[88:05])

• Should the right “disavow” Nick Fuentes and others?

  • Michaels: It's a necessity for conservatism to draw a clear line against explicitly racist/sexist views (e.g., Fuentes statements about women, race-mixing) to retain moderates and avoid electoral doom.
  • Crowder: Blanket disavowals foster divisiveness and don’t engage the “why.” He believes in making clear where he disagrees (i.e., “disavowing ideas is good, disavowing people is dangerous”).
    • Crowder [53:01]: “No, my dispute is with the idea that people should ever disavow people and not listen wholesale...”
  • Michaels: Disavowal means ‘I don’t condone’—not a ban or cancellation. She’s not policing who Crowder interviews; just states the right should be explicit where lines are drawn.
    • Michaels [50:14]: “When you disavow someone, you’re saying, I don't condone. That is the literal definition of the word.”

• On Nick Fuentes’ Controversial Statements

  • Michaels: “There’s nothing funny about it. What’s... who’s the butt of that joke?” She worries young men are influenced into dangerous beliefs about consent/sex.
    • Michaels [45:50]: “It is not only repulsive messaging, I find it exceptionally dangerous.”
  • Crowder: Context matters; dismissing views out of hand pushes disaffected youth towards extremists.

• On Racism, the N-word, and Social Litmus Tests

  • Crowder argues that a zero-tolerance approach for “wrong” words ends up feeding the culture of cancellation that the left weaponizes (and that has been weaponized against Michaels herself).
  • Michaels: She personally finds slurs offensive but isn’t policing others' comedic or critical context. Her concern is with intentional, derogatory use.
    • Michaels [77:41]: “What I mean is in a derogatory fashion. Forgive me. You got me.”

• Women, Voting, and Gender Roles

  • Crowder makes a semi-serious case for restricting the vote to those drafted for service, hence not all women. He stresses context: it’s a philosophy of obligation-based citizenship, not hatred of women.
    • Crowder [54:34]: “I think that only those in the draft should vote. So if women want the draft, sure.”
  • Michaels objects but recognizes much of this is rhetorical flourish and focused on conservative outreach rather than literal policy.

The Challenge of Platforming Controversial Figures

• Michaels argues that giving platforms to toxic figures helps those ideas spread, especially among impressionable youth, and that only highly skilled interviewers (e.g., Victor Davis Hanson) can safely “contain” them.
  • Michaels [94:09]: “He’s a master rhetorician... If you make one mistake, the stakes are too high.”
• Crowder holds that the only way to challenge ugly views is to interrogate them directly, citing his "Change My Mind" segments and Socratic approach.
  • Crowder [99:39]: “I would interview Hitler to try and prevent him from being Hitler... but I would interview teenage Hitler.”

Immigration, Race, and Assimilation

([112:30]-[122:34])

• Both agree that values and assimilation matter more than skin color, but Crowder insists it’s unproductive to demonize voters concerned about demographic shifts as “racist.”
  • Michaels: “For me personally, the melanin in someone’s skin is not my concern...” ([114:25])
  • Crowder: “Meeting them where they are... and understanding it...” ([122:47])
• Agreement: Cultural values and assimilation matter; neither supports “demographic displacement,” but differ on language used to discuss it.

Notable Quotes & Exchanges

• “Disavowing ideas is good, I do it all the time; disavowing people wholesale, especially based on misleading or out of context quotes, is not good... That's the game the left plays.” —Steven Crowder [79:53]

• “My agenda is for young boys not to end up in jail thinking the girl really wants them to keep going, or for some girl who says no to get raped... for young kids not to hate people of color...” —Jillian Michaels [72:20]

• “You’re acting very much the way the feminist left acts today—demanding people behave as you deem acceptable, making inferences based on implication rather than taking words...” —Crowder [65:34]

• “I'm not telling conservatives what to do. I'm trying to tell conservatives I think we're kind of on the same page about the bigger picture. I'm coming at it from this angle... The politics in large part is math.” —Michaels [82:21]

Fitness, Health, and “Fat Pride”

([126:10]-[134:07])

• Jillian Michaels on practical health fundamentals:

  • “Eat whole foods, don’t overeat, move more. In a perfect world, strength training four days a week is amazing…” [126:15]
  • Explains how "Big Food" manipulated the “fat acceptance” movement as a cynical industry strategy; ties to Big Pharma, too.

• On body positivity as a cultural ‘psyop’

  • Crowder underscores accountability differences between young men and women; Michaels agrees men now also face harmful, unrealistic body standards.

Tone, Takeaways, and Final Thoughts

Honesty and friction:
Both Crowder and Michaels hold strong, occasionally abrasive positions but never resort to personal attacks. Both stress their mutual agenda: a healthy country, good role models, and listening without wholesale bans. Crowder is undeterred in his defense of open debate; Michaels is concerned about platforming toxic ideas but admits there are no easy answers.

Agreement and Reflection:
Amid sharp disagreement, both find common ground (Second Amendment, importance of fathers, skepticism regarding Big Food/Pharma, and the need for real role models for boys). The final segment is genuinely warm and collaborative, both pledging respect and openness to further discussion.

Memorable Moments by Timestamp

• [36:45] “Are you, in fact, a white nationalist?”—Crowder
  “No, I am not a white nationalist.” —Michaels
• [45:50] “It is not only repulsive messaging, I find it exceptionally dangerous.”—Michaels re: Fuentes rhetoric
• [79:50] “Disavowing ideas is actually productive and should be done.”—Crowder
• [130:43] “I totally agree with you... I was labeled a white supremacist nationalist. Both of which are untrue.”—Michaels
• [138:35] “Hopefully you can come back and we can find something to bitch about together.”—Crowder

Conclusions

• Steven Crowder: Advocates interrogating, not shunning, disagreeable voices—believes in hard questions, not in drawing arbitrary lines of ‘disavowal’ that can later be weaponized.
• Jillian Michaels: Voices concern for how dangerous rhetoric can influence youth (especially boys); sees “disavowal” as moral necessity, not censorship.
• Both: Value open dialogue, acknowledge the difficulty of the moment, find much agreement on fitness, health, fatherhood, and skepticism of the left’s culture war.

For Further Engagement

• Crowder: “Download the Rumble app, follow there for all references and research.”
• Jillian Michaels: “Just go to JillianMichaels.com—everything I do is there.”

Crowder and Michaels’ conversation serves as an intense yet respectful microcosm of the American dialogue on boundaries, speech, and the future of the conservative movement—and even offers a little practical advice for your New Year's fitness goals.