I do remember seeing on my Crime Radar App an ambulance called to tte courthouse on the 2nd day of his testimony. I would have never thought it was for him because he was holding up through his testimony. My heart breaks so much for him. Patrick will probably experience these sudden attacks for years to come. The trauma he suffered is immeasurable, Praying his new life helps him heal and eases the trauma ❤️🩹🙏#PatickClancy
Tonight we learned that Patrick Clancy met his new wife Rachel Danis in January 2024, exactly 1 year after the death of his children, they got married April of 2026. We also got confirmation that they are starting a family.
The Prime-Time Playbook: Narrative Laundering on 60 Minutes
If I were a journalist reporting on the recent 60 Minutes segment on Patrick Clancy, I would ask, “What was the point of that?” It was a prime-time feature that played out as an incredibly strange, unearned reality update.
The broadcast kicked off by quickly discussing postpartum depression and the pharmaceutical conveyor belt, then jumped from a horrific family tragedy into a casual story about a New York run club, phone wallpapers, and a coffee shop romance.
There was no investigative tension. The interviewer never pushed back, never asked a difficult question, and treated the entire situation as a completely settled story.
The average person would walk away confused about why a major network dedicated an entire block of television just to show that a husband from a past headline has moved on, remarried, and is now living in Manhattan.
So, what was the point?
Calling this broadcast “empty, hollow television” is far too kind. When a news program abdicates its core duty to the public, it isn't just lazy journalism - it is active complicity.
By completely ignoring the fact that a “not guilty” plea remains active and that a mistrial means the case is legally unresolved, the broadcast actively participated in a massive deception. They allowed the audience to believe the foundational facts were settled, when the reality is that the core proof has never been established.
Without a definitive who and when, none of the narrative fluff matters. 60 Minutes didn't care about the truth of who or when - they only cared about containing the narrative.
By ignoring the active legal context, the network traded any hard questions for deliberate public relations laundering. It weaponized a flagship news platform to sanitize an open case and rehabilitate a public profile, proving that modern television has completely replaced independent journalism with highly calculated narrative containment.
Last week, @X sued several people who abused Creator Revenue Sharing by operating a coordinated network of accounts, posting inauthentic content to manipulate engagement, and using multiple bank accounts to hide their scheme.
We do not tolerate fraudulent behavior on X -- and will act forcefully to protect our platform and the earnings of genuine creators.
You can read our lawsuit here: https://t.co/EKHFX06nSY
Patrick Clancy on 60 Minutes.
"Did you ask Lindsay why she did it?"
Patrick asked Lindsay Clancy if she remembered doing it.
Lindsay said it was "like a dream".
"And she remembered it much in the way you would remember a dream after waking up."
Effect of the drugs or psychosis?
Anybody else disappointed by that interview? He didn’t even ask about PC’s thoughts on another trial! What a puff-piece @60Minutes
There wouldn’t be so many conspiracy theories if MSP had done a proper investigation & if the CW had a timeline that worked and jived with testimony
Patrick Clancy should be thrown in jail simply for giving this 60 Minutes interview. Cannot even wrap my head around what the end game could possibly here