Crowder Chronicles
Article Sponsor:


The “conservative” media sphere is currently entangled in a complex web of personal and professional controversies involving prominent pundit Steven Crowder, his estranged wife Hillary Crowder, and former colleague Jared Monroe. The trio’s disputes have unfolded in a public arena, shedding light on the intricate dynamics of workplace relations, legal battles, and personal grievances within the conservative commentary world.

Before we begin, know that everything in this article has been found in the now public court proceedings. We have always seen Steven Crowder as a grifter (as is much of the “conservative” alt-media), but know that we wanted to make sure we weren’t completely biased against him when writing this here at Offensively Patriotic. I, myself, kind of see all parties as being full of shit. However, now more information has come to light and it does indeed seem like Steven is still the bigger issue in all of this.

Now, with that out of the way, let’s jump in.

Jared Monroe’s Allegations

Jared Monroe, formerly known as “Not Gay Jared” on the Louder with Crowder [YouTube channel] show, left the program in 2018 amid less-publicized circumstances. Recently, Monroe released a video detailing his grievances and accusations against Steven Crowder and the show’s parent company. Monroe alleges that his departure was precipitated by a toxic work environment and that subsequent legal actions taken against him, including a cease and desist order and a Rule 202 petition, were attempts at silencing and intimidating him.

These legal moves seem to corroborate Monroe’s claims of being targeted in a manner that suggests a retaliatory motive, ostensibly for his decision to leave the show and possibly for airing the company’s internal issues.

Steven Crowder’s Divorce

Steven Crowder’s divorce from Hillary has added another layer of controversy to the public discourse. Initially a private affair, the divorce has become intertwined with Crowder’s professional life, especially as allegations surfaced regarding his behavior towards staff and his abusive nature caught on video towards his wife.

The divorce proceedings have revealed not only the personal animosity between the couple but also the complex financial and custodial negotiations at play. Gerald, the CEO of the company associated with Louder with Crowder, brought up the divorce in public statements, further blurring the lines between the personal and professional aspects of the case.

The legal entanglements in this saga are multi-faceted, involving cease and desist orders, petitions for depositions, and public accusations. Documents leaked or released in connection to the cases reveal a narrative of legal pressure, with Monroe claiming that Crowder’s team used legal means as a form of retaliation.

Furthermore, the divorce between Steven and Hillary Crowder has exposed potential legal strategies used to influence public perception and settlement negotiations. The use of legal tools in these disputes appears to be a tactical move to manage the fallout from both the divorce and Monroe’s allegations.

It’s also been shown that Steven Crowder now has a list of people being questioned in the case including past employees besides Jared.

Public and Personal Repercussions

The dispute has had significant repercussions for all involved, particularly Steven Crowder, whose public image as a conservative commentator is at stake. The revelations from Monroe and the divorce proceedings have prompted public debates on the nature of Crowder’s personal and professional conduct.

The situation raises questions about the interplay between personal integrity and public persona in the world of media and commentary. Furthermore, the public airing of these grievances has led to broader discussions on workplace culture, legal ethics, and the boundaries of personal privacy for public figures.

Custody and Personal Conduct

A critical aspect of the Crowder divorce saga is the custody battle over the couple’s children. Allegations of Steven’s inappropriate behavior, coupled with the contentious nature of the divorce, have spotlighted the issue of child custody, with both parties reportedly seeking different arrangements. Interestingly, it is Steven who filed for sole custody, while Hillary filed for a shared setup.

This further shows the narcissistic behavior of Steven, in my opinion, and even shows the possibly reasons for the following issue in this situation.

See Also: Who’s Really Running Corporate Media?

The Dog Issue and Alleged Deceptions

The narrative also touches on the fate of the family dog, with claims that Hillary sought to remove the pet from Steven’s custody, citing safety concerns. The specific safety concerns revolve around Steven having the children and was only a “what if” case. The “what if” being if Steven does have the kids, what will he do with the dog?

This aspect of the dispute underscores the bitter nature of the divorce and the extent to which personal disagreements have spilled over into public discourse. Moreover, allegations of deceptive practices by Gerald, particularly in the representation of legal and financial matters, add another layer of intrigue to the unfolding drama, raising questions about the veracity of the claims and counterclaims made by both sides.

The deceptive aspect of the $25,000 per month that Steven Crowder was supposedly paying Hillary Crowder lies in the misrepresentation of the nature and purpose of these payments. Gerald, the CEO of the company, implied in his statements that this amount was a direct payment to Hillary for her personal use, suggesting a narrative of financial greed or advantage on her part.

However, the truth, as revealed in the legal documents is that this $25,000 monthly payment was a temporary court-ordered amount intended to cover Hillary’s legal expenses during the divorce proceedings, not personal spending money. The court determined this amount to ensure that Hillary could adequately defend herself and participate in the legal process, given the substantial financial resources at Steven’s disposal and the potential imbalance this created.

While this is horribly typical of all divorces, this isn’t what Gerald leaned on in his remarks.

This misrepresentation aimed to paint Hillary in a negative light, suggesting she was receiving a substantial sum monthly for personal gain, whereas in reality, the funds were allocated for legal fees, a common practice in divorce proceedings to ensure both parties can fairly engage in the legal process.

On one hand, I can see why this is an issue to many. It has been argued that Steven is basically funding his own demise. However, the narrative Gerald presented was misleading, failing to clarify the true purpose of the payments, thus contributing to a potentially skewed perception of the financial dynamics of the divorce.


The ongoing disputes involving Steven Crowder, Jared Monroe, and Hillary Crowder offer a window into the tumultuous intersections of media, politics, and personal life. As each party navigates the legal and public relations minefields, the broader implications for media ethics, personal conduct, and public accountability remain key points of consideration and debate.

Because of just how much info had to be broken down for this article and due to the legal sensitivities in this topic, all sources that deal with any information that is even slightly touched upon will be listed below.


Jared’s Initial Video:…
Jared’s Fundraiser:…
LWC Response:…
LWC Documents Response Thread:…
Lauren Southern’s Video:…
Article on Crowder Custody:…
Current Revolt Twitter:
DailyMail Crowder Custody Article (No Paywall):…
Steven Crowder StopBigCon:…
DailyWire Response To Crowder:…
Hilary’s Lawyer Reps Tucker Carlson:…
WebMd Dogo Argentino:…
Ring Timing Complaints:…
Article About Ring Video:…

Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
Enable Notifications OK No thanks