Summary of What’s the Deal With Billy Evans? A Spoiler-Filled Guide to ‘You Can See Everything’

Overview of What’s the Deal With Billy Evans? A Spoiler-Filled Guide to ‘You Can See Everything’

This Hard Fork episode is a spoiler-heavy discussion of the new Nathan Fielder/Lance Oppenheim documentary You Can See Everything, which revisits Elizabeth Holmes, Theranos, and—unexpectedly—Holmes’s partner, Billy Evans. The conversation centers on who Billy Evans is, why he became such a prominent figure in the film, what his new pet blood-testing startup says about him, and whether his relationship with Holmes is genuine, opportunistic, or both. The episode also includes a follow-up interview with Bad Blood author John Carreyrou to answer listener questions about Holmes, Theranos, and the film’s portrayal of the scandal.

The Billy Evans / Elizabeth Holmes Focus

Why Billy Evans became the breakout character

• The hosts note that, surprisingly, Evans dominates much of the documentary’s second half.
• He comes off as:
  • intensely performative,
  • evasive but charming,
  • and strangely central to the story of Holmes’s post-Theranos life.
• The film raises as many questions about Evans as it does about Holmes:
  • Where did he come from?
  • What does he want from this relationship?
  • How much is he helping craft Holmes’s public image?

Hemanthus: the new startup

• Rob Copeland explains that Evans has been working on a new blood-testing startup called Hemanthus.
• Key details:
  • The company is aimed at pets, not humans.
  • The pitch: cheaper blood testing than going to a vet.
  • It appears to be very early-stage and underfunded.
  • The company reportedly raised about $3 million, far less than what a real blood diagnostics company would need.
• The hosts are skeptical that it is a serious business in any meaningful product sense.
• They joke that it feels more like a “circus show” or an inside joke than a functioning company.

Holmes’s involvement in the new venture

• In the film, Holmes appears to be deeply involved in Evans’s startup, despite her prison sentence and fraud conviction.
• The conversation raises the issue of whether she can legally be involved in advising or helping the company.
• Carreyrou says the film strongly suggests Holmes is still part of the effort, at least informally, and that the documentary captures them making investor calls together.

What the Guests Thought of the Documentary

Rob Copeland’s take

• Copeland had already reported on Evans’s startup before the documentary came out.
• He says Evans was unexpectedly charming and highly controlled in interviews.
• He notes that Evans often answers questions in a way that seems designed to tell the story he wants told, not the one actually being asked.
• Copeland was surprised to learn the documentary had already captured months or years of footage on the same subject he had been investigating.

Erin Griffin’s take

• Griffin emphasizes the strange overlap between Evans and Holmes’s relationship and the earlier Holmes/Sunny Balwani dynamic.
• She thinks the film encourages viewers to see Evans as both:
  • a supportive partner,
  • and a calculated self-promoter who benefits from proximity to Holmes.

Are they in love?

• The hosts debate whether the relationship is real.
• One view: the relationship seems genuine, even tender in moments.
• Another view: Evans gets access, attention, and relevance from being attached to Holmes.
• The overall conclusion is that the relationship may be both emotionally real and strategically useful.

The Documentary’s Bigger Themes

Holmes as a symbol

• The episode argues that Holmes remains culturally sticky because she sits at the intersection of:
  • Silicon Valley mythology,
  • fraud and ambition,
  • public fascination with women founders,
  • and media obsession with reinvention.
• The film is seen as part documentary, part attempt at narrative rehabilitation.

The “miscommunication” defense

• Carreyrou rejects the idea that Holmes merely “miscommunicated.”
• He argues the evidence shows she knowingly lied about Theranos’s technology and capabilities.
• He says the fraud becomes unmistakable by fall 2013, when Theranos begins live operations with Walgreens despite not having reliable technology.

The Sonny Balwani question

• A listener asks whether it could have all been Sonny’s fault.
• Carreyrou says no:
  • Sonny was involved,
  • but Holmes was CEO and had the power.
• He describes the company as run by the two of them as a unit.

Holmes’s psychology

• Carreyrou says he does not believe Holmes lacks awareness of reality.
• His view:
  • she knew what she was doing,
  • she had many chances to admit wrongdoing,
  • and she consistently refused to do so.
• He sees the judge’s sentencing observation about the “pathology of fraud” as an accurate encapsulation of Holmes’s mindset.

Key Revelations and Notable Moments

The Abbott and Costello scene

• The hosts ask Carreyrou about the scene where Fielder shows Holmes the classic “Who’s on First?” routine.
• Carreyrou believes Holmes was likely playing dumb, not actually confused.
• He interprets it as part of a broader effort to present herself as unusual, misunderstood, or neurodivergent in a way that could help explain away past behavior.

The Twitter account mystery

• The film suggests Billy may be running Holmes’s social media from prison.
• The hosts play a game of guessing whether certain posts were written by Holmes or Evans.
• Their read:
  • some posts feel distinctly like Billy’s voice,
  • others seem more likely to be Holmes’s,
  • but the whole thing reinforces the sense that Evans is helping manage her public persona.

The “digital replica” issue

• The episode notes that Evans and Holmes appear to have tried to monetize her image and story, including a digital likeness or replica.
• The guests view this as exploitative and opportunistic.

John Carreyrou on the Real Theranos Story

Why Holmes is still in the news

• Carreyrou says the reason Holmes remains a story is simple: she keeps re-entering the public conversation by attempting to reshape her own legacy.
• He argues the documentary is not just about the past—it’s Holmes’s attempt to influence how history remembers her.

The most important evidence of fraud

• Carreyrou points to:
  • false claims to media and investors,
  • Theranos’s faulty Edison device,
  • and the use of hacked or modified Siemens machines to run tests.
• He explains that the technology never worked as promised.

Tyler Schultz and whistleblowing

• Carreyrou recounts how Tyler Schultz became an important source and whistleblower.
• He describes the pressure, intimidation, and legal threats Schultz endured after raising concerns internally and then externally.
• The takeaway: Theranos’s leadership aggressively tried to suppress the truth.

Other News Topics Covered in the Episode

CoreWeave and the AI infrastructure bubble

• Rob Copeland discusses CoreWeave, an AI infrastructure company leasing compute to major AI firms.
• Concerns:
  • heavy debt load,
  • rapid growth financed on shaky assumptions,
  • and rising costs to service debt.
• He frames CoreWeave as a potential warning sign for the broader AI boom.

Elon Musk’s empire consolidation

• Erin Griffin highlights Elon Musk’s comments about possibly merging SpaceX and Tesla.
• The discussion focuses on:
  • Musk’s desire for more control,
  • the possibility that the merger would help him consolidate power,
  • and whether this is another example of Musk using one strong business to support another.

Joel Kaplan leaving Meta

• Griffin also covers the departure of Joel Kaplan, Meta’s global policy chief.
• She describes him as a key conservative operator inside Facebook/Meta for years.
• Her read:
  • Kaplan’s departure may reflect exhaustion and timing rather than any dramatic ideological shift.
• She speculates he could end up in a future Trump-aligned political role.

Bottom Line

• The documentary’s biggest surprise is not just Holmes herself, but Billy Evans, who emerges as a major character and possibly a co-author of the next chapter of the Holmes saga.
• The guests largely agree that:
  • Holmes remains a fraudster who knowingly misled people,
  • Evans is both emotionally invested and opportunistic,
  • and the documentary is part exposure, part attempted reinvention.
• The episode closes by urging listeners to read Bad Blood if they want the full investigative account behind the story.