This wouldn't surprise me. I haven't listened to the interviews myself, but a lot of people here seem to base their claims on having read secondary sources, not primary sources. In other words, their view of reality is based on how a journalist decided to summarize a conversation that is often multiple hours long. I'm not sure this constitutes a strong enough chain of evidence to diagnose someone with a mental illness.

Could you suggest a recent interview as an example? I’d like to judge myself.

I’m of the opinion he’s both someone with good intentions with good points but who makes those points sideways. But also that he’s mentally I’ll so he’s losing the ability to communicate clearly. I also think Candace Owens is an untrustworthy person with only self serving intentions.

Not the person you asked, but here’s an interview that released yesterday.

https://youtu.be/-ZmbP5vIbyk

Thanks. I was looking forward to watching that. The comments thread was mostly positive.

It’s gone now. Memory holed.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttps... is somehow still working for me, but it may be region-specific

There’s a mirror now https://youtu.be/HbeYKOqzBVk

Something worth pointing out: Candace Owens' husband owns Parler.

Would those be the points where he rehashes the same antisemitic tropes which have circulated for hundreds of years and every once in a while leads to the massacres of innocent people? Because if he doesn’t get an out due to mental illness he is just another little attention whore neonazi.