🚨IMMEDIATE RELEASE 🚨 Rep. Dan Crenshaw Threatens to Sue Shawn Ryan...

I want to address something directly with all of you who've supported this show and made it what it is today. On December 9th, 2025, I received a legal demand letter from lawyers representing Congressman Dan Crenshaw. They are threatening to sue me for defamation because of comments I made on my podcast about a message that he sent me. They want me to remove content, issue a public apology, and stop talking about him. I'm not going to do any of that.

Let me give you full context so you can judge for yourself. What I originally said a while back, I commented on my show about Congressman Crenshaw throwing an extremely expensive party and the fact that he seems to have become quite wealthy during his time in Congress. I raised questions about how a congressman making $174,000 a year can afford that kind of a lifestyle? These are legitimate questions.

And to be honest, I didn't even mention Dan Crenshaw's name in that initial conversation. I just brought up the fact that he was having Steve Aoki, a major DJ, spin at his party. And then, you know, let's fast forward a couple years and they got Steve Aoki DJing their 40th birthday party.

How does that happen?

I don't have first-hand experience in this. I have often questioned the same thing.

These are legitimate questions. Multiple news outlets have reported on concerns about Congressional insider trading and members of Congress, including Congressman Crenshaw, actively trading stocks while having access to non-public information that affects those very stocks. I'm not the only person asking these questions, but apparently I'm the one that got under Dan's skin. After I made those comments, Congressman Crenshaw sent me an Instagram message.

I'm going to publish the actual screenshot so you can see for yourself. Right here. Here's what it says. Hey Sean, you have the ability to contact your fellow team guy if you've got a problem with me or have questions about how I'm getting rich. Some of my boys at 6 told me about your indirect swipe at me.

From the comment you made, it sounds like you have some beliefs that are based on trendy narratives instead of facts. Now, let me be clear about what I saw when I read that message. A sitting United States Congressman, who happens to be a former Navy SEAL, sent me a message saying, my boys at six told me about my criticism of him. My boys at six. That means SEAL Team Six,

development group, the most elite special operations unit in the United States military and arguably the world. When I received that message in the context of me criticizing him, I interpreted it as threatening. Maybe I was wrong.

Maybe he just meant that some guys he used to work with told him about my comments and he wanted to have a friendly chat. But that's not how it read to me and I said so on my podcast. Now here's a clip of Congressman Dan Crenshaw literally saying if he ever meets Tucker Carlson, he will fucking kill him.

Have you ever met Tucker?

So I'm just curious, what would you think if Congressman Dan Crenshaw sent you a message saying, "'His boys, it's six' after he threatened to kill Tucker Carlson?" Now his lawyers are claiming that my interpretation of his message is defamation. They say I accused him of threatening me with assault, which is a crime, and that I need to publicly apologize and remove the content from my show.

Here's my response. No. I'm publishing their full demand letter along with my lawyer's response so that you can read both and decide for yourself whether my interpretation was unreasonable. This isn't really about whether I misunderstood a message. This is about whether a sitting member of Congress can use the threat of an expensive

litigation to silence criticism. I asked questions about Congressman Crenshaw as well. Those questions are fair game. He is a public official. He makes decisions that affect all of us. He trades stocks while having access to classified and non-public information. The public has a right to ask how he's getting rich while he's in office. Instead of answering those questions, he sent me a message that referenced SEAL Team 6. And when I said that message felt threatening, he lawyered up and demanded I apologize and shut up.

And I won't. Now, what's going to happen next? If Congressman Crenshaw wants to sue me, he can. My lawyers are ready, and if he does, we're going to use the discovery process to get answers to all the questions I originally asked.

Questions about his finances and how he affords the lifestyle he's living on a congressional salary. I suspect that's the last thing Dan actually wants. But here's what I think is really going on. Congressman Dan thought he could intimidate me into silence. He thought a legal threat would make me back down.

But unfortunately, Dan, you're wrong. I'm a veteran. I've been in combat, too. I've faced actual threats. A demand letter from a D.C. law firm, unfortunately, does not scare me. So let me clarify my position for the record.

Congressman Crenshaw sent me a message that said, my boys at six told me about my criticism

of him.

I interpreted that as threatening. Maybe he didn't intend it that way. Maybe he's just really bad at communication. But when a congressman invokes elite special operations forces into a message to someone who's criticizing him, that person is allowed to find it threatening. And you know what? I still want answers to my original questions. How has Congressman Crenshaw accumulated significant wealth while serving in Congress.

What stocks has he traded, and when? Did he have access to non-public information that affected those trades? How did he afford that expensive party? These are questions every American should be asking about every member of Congress. The fact that Congressman Crenshaw's response is to threaten litigation rather than provide answers tells you everything you need to know.

To my audience, I'm publishing everything—the original message, the demand letter, my lawyer's response—because I believe in transparency. You've made this show what it is. You deserve to see all the facts and make your own judgment. If you think I misinterpreted the message, that's fine. Reasonable people can disagree, but I don't think my interpretation was unreasonable.

And I'm certainly not going to apologize for asking legitimate questions about a public official's finances. To Congressman Crenshaw, sir, if you want to clarify what you meant by, my boys at six, you're welcome to do so. If you want to answer your questions about your wealth accumulation and your stock trading.

I'll give you time to do it. But if you think you're going to silence me with legal threats, you've badly miscalculated. I'm not going anywhere. And neither are the questions. Thank you, Dan. Thank you, Dan.

I'm sure we'll talk soon.