Candace Owens covers Pam Bondi's firing, challenges Turning Point USA to release Charlie Kirk succession video, and investigates Erika Kirk's whereabouts on September 10th
Solo episode of the Candace Owens podcast covering three major stories.
Summary
Candace Owens opens with the firing of Attorney General Pam Bondi, arguing it has nothing to do with the Epstein files and everything to do with Trump believing Bondi tipped off Congressman Eric Swalwell about an FBI investigation into his relationship with a Chinese intelligence operative. She then delivers an extended challenge to Turning Point USA — specifically spokesman Blake Neff — to release a video they claim shows Charlie Kirk naming Erika Kirk as his successor weeks before his death, arguing that the refusal to release it, combined with the audio-only presentation at Amfest and the implausibility of the story, raises serious questions about whether the footage exists. The episode's most detailed segment concerns Owens's investigation into Erika Kirk's whereabouts on September 10th — the day Charlie Kirk was shot — concluding, based on multiple witness accounts, that Erika was not with her mother as publicly claimed, and that the narrative appears to have been constructed in advance.
Key Takeaways
FULL TRANSCRIPT
Opening and Overview
Candace Owens: Happy Thursday. Pam Bondi has been fired. That's obviously big news. I guess it's good. Probably will be replaced with somebody worse. I don't know. But I'm still wondering how Blake Neff is still employed. Blake Neff — he is my favorite of the Shady Bunch over at Turning Point USA, because I just don't know how he does it. He is just so notably and publicly emotionally immature that he makes what we do fun here. He gets angry. He lashes out. He says stuff, and inevitably he always just kind of makes things worse for them. It's like watching reruns of Tom and Jerry. We know how it ends, but Tom's got a Tom, Blake's got a Blake.
Also, it is high time — before we go on break next week — that we begin delicately prodding the narrative that Erika was with her mother receiving treatments when she got the call from Mikey McCoy that Charlie had been shot. I have been quietly investigating that in the background, and I'd like to tell you what I have thus far discovered. So let's get into it.
Update on Zachariah Keshi and the Fort Huachuca Connection
First and foremost, I wanted to provide you guys with a fun little update, because yesterday we told you about decoy boy number two, Zachariah Keshi. He was detained. Kash Patel shut down the investigation for an hour and a half, and then he was released, and we weren't told much more. We revealed to you — and that was in large credit due to Baron Coleman — that his dad is an O-6 in the Navy. He's in the Navy reserves part-time. Mitch Snow saw a meeting concluding in Fort Huachuca the day before, and he said there were a lot of O-6s, and I sort of wondered out loud whether or not Daddy Keshi had any connections to Fort Huachuca via his built app that he co-founded, which I am told and now understand is exactly for mission prep — it has the ability to create a real 3D visual walkthrough. So in this example, you could see, without being in Utah, where Charlie was going to be sitting, where you were going to take him and drive him to Timpanogos Hospital, which door you were going to go through at Timpanogos — if you were prepping for a mission, that app would come in handy.
Now, again, I can't say that's what it was used for. But what I can state is that someone else in Zachariah Keshi's family — Tor Keshi is his name — was in fact stationed at Fort Huachuca. Same family. According to Tor Keshi's LinkedIn, he trained there using reconnaissance drones. He trained how to use reconnaissance drones. So I just thought that you should know that it really is like a military family affair surrounding this event.
The Mythomania of Guilty Consciences — Netanyahu and the Kirk Succession Narrative
Anyway, now quickly switching gears to the topic of the day. There is something about a guilty conscience — it causes people to overthink unnecessarily. They scheme. They plot. They're trying to fill in holes in a narrative. They're trying to be prepared, but they don't really pause to consider that sometimes with too many details, or overthinking things and saying too much, you kind of incriminate yourself. It's unnecessary complexity added to an issue. Too many details. What transpires is something known as mythomania. I learned this word today. That's our vocab word of the day. Mythomania. Definition: it is an unusual or pathological tendency to exaggerate or tell lies.
Example — I would say Bibi Netanyahu. Perfect example of this overthinking, making things complex. When Charlie died, his team were thinking too hard. They were like, "Okay, so here's what we're going to do. So people definitely don't think it's you — as soon as he gets shot, you should tweet, even before the President of the United States, that you're praying for Charlie. That will definitely remove suspicion. If you tweet first, even though you're fighting this massive war everywhere and this isn't your country, if you tweet first that you're praying for Charlie, no one will think it was you." Narrator: people did in fact find that tweet to be remarkably suspicious. And then his team were overthinking some more and were like, "Okay, here's what we're going to do. The very next day we'll get you on Fox, where you should passionately deny that you killed him. That will definitely remove any suspicion." Narrator: it most certainly did not remove any suspicion. Again, they went a little too complex.
Similarly, when I sat down with Erika Kirk on December 15th, I had a very short list of questions that I was seeking clarity on. I did not — you'll recall, back in December — think that Erika was a part of any plot to assassinate her husband. Did I think some of her actions and movements were strange? Sure. But I was being very empirical, just following what was in front of me, following the proof that I had. And Erika had not told any verifiable lies to the public until right before we met. She publicly told Glenn Beck that she had Charlie's phone and he did not text people the night before saying that he was fearful of his life. That was for me the first red flag. It was a disastrous PR campaign altogether that week, which ended with her alongside Bari Weiss. That was weird to me. My antenna started going up.
But when I went into that meeting nonetheless, I had very pure intentions. I just wanted to seek clarity. At no point on my podcast prior to that moment had I attacked Erika — nor, and this is perhaps more crucial, nor did I ever question whether or not Charlie wanted her to become the CEO. Frankly, my thought when they announced her as CEO was that it was probably for the public. It's like everyone's so emotional, everyone feels all over the place. It was supposed to be this emotional feel-good — hey, we're making a public decision. Charlie is gone, but his legacy is going to live on through his wife. And I thought she's probably not really going to be the CEO. It's just she's going to more kind of be the icon, and Justin Streiff is probably going to be running things behind the scenes.
So I was very caught off guard and surprised when, during our meeting, out of nowhere, they pulled out a piece of paper which they had printed out and said, "Oh, this is a transcript — a transcript of what Charlie said when he named Erika, said that he wanted Erika to take over for him in the event that he dies." I was like, "Huh?" And they were going to hand me the transcript. I was like, "I haven't even talked about this at all on my show. I don't need that." And I was surprised because I didn't ask for it. I didn't ask for proof of that. Didn't make any claims about that. But they for some reason wanted to clarify that, to put that on record — something that didn't really need clarification. Why were they overthinking that? So of course the opposite thing happened, where for the first time I thought: is there something weird about that? Did Charlie actually say that?
Erika Kirk's Claims About the Succession Video
Erika had previously, before I sat down with her, confirmed that there was a video of this moment — a video of Charlie, just weeks before he died, saying that he wanted her to take over the company. A stunning claim, for two reasons right off the bat.
One, because Charlie Kirk, on every stage he was ever on, repeatedly said that women should not aspire to climb the corporate ladder and become CEOs, because that is not fulfilling. He said over and over again that home life was of more substance, of more value. He said this even beside Erika, in front of Erika, across from Erika. They together spoke about the mistake of women thinking that they could have it all. And he was speaking about that in an environment where there were two living parents. So even with two living parents, Charlie stated profusely to his audiences that women should not strive toward corporatism.
Now suddenly we're being told by Erika that privately, and also just a couple of weeks before he died, Charlie had completely reversed course — and he did that in a private setting in front of his donors. He just did a 180, and within the most dramatic situation imaginable, he was saying: if I die, which would reduce our children to having just one parent, I would want at that moment my wife to step up and assume the role of CEO.
And that's certainly what Erika Kirk told Megyn Kelly on November 24th. Take a listen.
Erika Kirk: "In August, before all this happened, he had an event where he had some donors at, and one of the first questions they asked was, 'God forbid if something happens to you, what would happen next at Turning Point?' And Charlie made a really interesting point. He said companies — you know, example, Apple, Macintosh — he said they're founder-led. But what I have built will one day, if I'm not around, be vision-led. And he had made mention at the end, like, 'You know, Erika will do a great job running it.' And when I watched that video this week, it really put into perspective my youth and what I went through growing up and what I witnessed — my mom having her own company and being a single mother — and watching her be the blueprint of, you know, I'm not afraid of raising my children alone because I saw my mom do that. I'm not afraid of being a CEO because I saw my mom do that."
Candace Owens: So now it's kind of tracking for me why she started saying that her mother grew up as a single mother. She never did. I told you Erika had a bonus parent. She always had a stepfather in the home when her parents divorced, and her father was always in her life. But I see now we're curating for this moment of becoming the CEO, and this feels too timely.
This investor meeting she's referring to took place from August 15th to the 17th in Aspen. So this was a mere three weeks before Charlie died. And making matters more interesting was Amfest — Turning Point's big year-end event. They decided to premiere Charlie saying this, but audio only. They stripped the video and used just the audio as Erika's walkout music. They used what they are alleging is Charlie's voice, but no video. That's a very curious decision, because if you do in fact have a video of Charlie naming his wife to the position of CEO, wouldn't that be the most powerful footage you could possibly release to get the public to rally behind her? Everyone's missing him. They're missing his voice. Wouldn't that be the first thing you did? How powerful would it have been to have a video running and then you see Charlie and he's like, "I want my wife to be the CEO if I die"? So I'm wondering what would possibly guide your decision to only release the audio.
And I'm going to allow you to listen to that audio. I want you to listen carefully.
Charlie Kirk (audio): "A lot of this could be done without me. And I believe that. From the high school department, the college department — let's make Turning Point so big that it can survive beyond just the founder. A lot of organizations and groups, as soon as a founder leaves, it just kind of collapses. A lot of my job is not always in the day-to-day details. It's very much vision casting, very much driving success. But we have a great board, and God forbid if something happens, they'll figure it out. I appoint my wife to run Turning Point USA. If something happens to me, Erika would do a great job."
Candace Owens: Just sort of a weird ending there. No real answer to the question. "We have a great board — they'll figure everything out" — and then suddenly, "I appoint my wife." So great point. It seems out of place. At the very least, we can determine that that is clearly edited audio. That's very clearly edited audio.
So I set about, after I met with Erika, reaching out to people who attended that event. Trying to figure out — okay, who attended this event? What was their memory of it? And I spoke to a total of four people. Three out of the four — one was a couple — did not remember Charlie saying this. They did not remember Charlie Kirk saying this. And the fourth person — or rather a couple — who said that they did remember it, without giving you any further details, would be considered a conflicted witness, because they have ties to Turning Point outside of a donor relationship. I found that to be very compelling. That's not something you forget. She said it's the first question he's asked: "Hey, you're 31. What happens if you die? Who do you want to take over?" That does not ring true to me.
Blake Neff's Response and the Public Demand for the Video
Anyway, so the day before yesterday, Blake Neff went to Arizona State University, and somebody asked him a question and really kind of took them to the cleaners — saying, "Look, Turning Point's got some shady connections. Erika, I used to be in a CIA video. You seem to be reversing course on everything that Charlie wanted. What's going on here?" And Blake Neff was very emotional, as he always is. He went on to emphatically insist that Charlie desperately wanted Erika to be his successor. I want you to take a listen to what Blake Neff said back to the student.
Blake Neff: "The reason Erika is front and center at Turning Point is because when Charlie was alive, people repeatedly asked, 'Charlie, we're worried something will happen to him.' People always speculated that something could happen to Charlie. And when he was asked, he would — first of all, he was totally fearless — he would just say, 'Oh, it'll be fine. Erika will take over for me.' That is what he said over and over. I saw them interact all the time, almost on a daily basis. Even when he was traveling, he was calling her all the time. He was talking to her all the time. Charlie and Erika were partners. They were husband and wife in a deep way. Their marriage was incredibly admirable. I've seen a lot of marriages. Some of them are good, some of them are bad. Charlie and Erika's was exceptional. They were on the same wavelength. I saw how much that relationship — I didn't know Erika as well prior to Charlie's death, but especially in the wake of it, I saw how much everything he'd done meant to her, and how completely committed she was to fulfilling his mission — what he had done in life — that she knew the life I thought I was going to live has changed very abruptly, but I am fearlessly going to embrace the new one because I know it's what I have to do for my husband and for his legacy. That is the reason she was put front and center. She has become the CEO of the organization because that is what Charlie wanted. And it's because I saw it — with all the people who were senior at Turning Point, there wasn't even a question that that is what would happen. There was no one forcing this. There was no one pressuring it to happen. This is what everyone at Turning Point wanted to happen."
Candace Owens: Yeah, I think the employees would say something else. But set another way, Blake is saying that Charlie prioritized his business above his family. That is what he's saying — that Charlie often thought about what would happen if he died, and in Charlie's head, he wanted his children to be raised by nannies while his wife assumed his position of CEO. Even though his whole life he said, even if you're married and you're both alive, a wife shouldn't do that. But he was like: if I die, the most important thing is going to be making sure that this company continues, and Erika is the right person to do this. He knew what that job consisted of — traveling, working 80-hour weeks sometimes. That's what they are telling you. Charlie cared more about Turning Point USA than his own children's well-being. There is no other rational way to interpret "if I die, I want my wife to assume this role."
So I thought — you know what? Blake shared that video publicly. I thought I'd politely ask Blake to maybe share the video of Charlie saying that, because it could go a very long way. Here's what I said beneath the video he shared on X. I said: "I love this. Can you please release the video that you shot in Aspen of him naming her as his successor a couple of weeks before he died? I just feel like that would go a long way."
And boy, did he get back to me with something fierce. Some would say he got a little too complex. He said this:
Blake Neff (written response): "Candace. We haven't bothered playing it because we know psychopathic predators like yourself do not care what is true or false, and normal evidentiary logic has no effect on you. You're the kind of person who sees coded messages in the number 33, but then ignores evidence like DNA on a rifle or Tyler Robinson's own family members turning him in. Playing the audio at Amfest already was not enough. You'll obviously just say it's AI or a hologram or an Israeli actor or something. So what's the point? We gave up the possibility of any good faith conversation with you months ago. It's like trying to reason with a maniac brandishing a knife and screaming at people on the subway. You are the same thing."
Candace Owens: Wow. Okay. It's a lot to unpack. I've never been compared to a maniac brandishing a weapon on a subway. First and foremost, 33 is in fact a Freemason degree. Not sure what that has to do with anything. It's a fact of life. I don't know why Kash Patel kept saying it, other than the fact that he was signaling to other Freemasons. Secondly, we have addressed the DNA on a rifle. Actually, you guys haven't. And I have been clear that it's actually you guys who refuse to tell the public that there were also five other sets of DNA found on the rifle. We know it's Tyler Robinson's rifle. We've never debated that. What we have said is that there is no evidence that that particular rifle was fired.
And I also have to ask the question — why are you bringing up AI? Am I hallucinating, or does Turning Point regularly share videos of Charlie Kirk all the time? So why is this particular one the one you're worried about people thinking is AI? They even share outdated videos and try to pretend that he's supporting the Iranian war — they're getting fact-checked on X because they're sharing outdated videos and misrepresenting Charlie's actual beliefs about the Iranian war. But now they're suddenly concerned that if they release one more crucial video, people will think it's a hologram or AI or an Israeli actor. Why does that feel more like a confession to me? Like they're trying to get ahead of something. Like this might be the reason they didn't release it in the first place.
And also — was I high, or was it not Erika, the CEO of Turning Point USA, and the team that guaranteed us they were going to release tons of never-before-seen speeches and videos? They had a whole supply of them. Can we run the clock back to 16 days after Charlie was killed and take a listen to them?
Erika Kirk: "We need to be able to have people have a show where they can ask questions — 'Hey, I'm up against this. What would Charlie say?' — and we play a clip of what Charlie said a month ago, a year ago. We have decades worth of my husband's voice. We have unused material from speeches that he's had that no one has heard yet. We have Sunday specials lined up to the brim, because my husband was so intentional about making sure that there was enough content always."
Unidentified voice: "He made sure we recorded everything."
Erika Kirk: "He would not do a speech unless we could get the video and the—"
Unidentified voice: "100%."
Erika Kirk: "So we have speeches that no one's heard of. We have interviews that no one's heard of. We have stuff from Korea and Japan that no one's heard of—"
Unidentified voice: "Podcast."
Erika Kirk: "So, in the words of my husband, buckle up, because there is a lot of content to be had, and we have so many amazing things down the pipeline that we are working on currently that we will unveil."
Unidentified voice: "I am so excited."
Candace Owens: Why is this not about Candace? What changed here? This is you guys making a promise that you were going to release Charlie. You've got his voice, you've got videos, you've got speeches, you've got never-before-seen everything. He's in Korea, he's with Mikey McCoy. Why is it suddenly that this one particular and most crucial video — a video that you yourselves introduced into the public conscience, absent any pressure — nobody said, "Hey, we need to know that Charlie wanted this thing immediately. What's the story? Did he go and say this at a retreat three weeks before he died?" We didn't put any pressure on you guys. You just casually mentioned and came up with a whole story that you had captured this video of Charlie's dying wish, because it's a normal question for donors to ask a 31-year-old man: "Hey, what happens if you die? Who do you want to take over?"
I've done a ton of donor events with Charlie, including ones in Aspen. Never heard this question ever. But I guess things changed. They had different concerns. And now I'm asking you guys the question: what changed, that me simply asking you to release this footage makes you angry? The mere idea of being asked to release this footage makes Blake angry.
And to this analogy — or accusation — that it's because you're afraid of a psychopathic predator like me brandishing a knife on the subway: I wanted to let you know, I laughed so hard at this. An X user named Sean had the immediate common sense response, because common sense is clearly lacking at Turning Point USA. He tweeted: "If a maniac was brandishing a knife and screaming at people on the subway because they wanted me to send them a video, I should send them the video." Like — yeah, man. Okay, I'll be your brandishing-knife psycho. Common sense here. Who says, "No, I'd rather die than show this psycho on the subway this video"? Nobody has to die today. Here it is — my husband saying he wants me to take over the company. Show the video to the psychopathic dude, Blake. No one wants to die on the red line.
And then someone replied and said: "The only person who wouldn't show the psychopath the video is the person who doesn't have it." That is the reality. Only the person who doesn't have it would not show the video.
Erika Kirk's Changing Narrative and the New York Times Book Summit
And yeah, I wanted to make that public demand because it now feels significant. It kind of locks in another piece of the puzzle here — with why Erika's story about her childhood seems to have changed. It's a dishonest narrative, but she was raised with a single mom, and they were just kind of shapeshifting a bit to get the public prepared for this moment or to accept this moment.
And I'm asking also because I have a trick up my sleeve, as always. I personally think it went something like this. They were overthinking. Someone in the room was like, "Okay, but if we name Erika the CEO like 48 hours later, then people might notice that Charlie — you know, all that footage of him for years touring around the world telling women to get married, raise kids, if they want a fulfilling life — wouldn't it be weird if she suddenly takes his position? Like people might wonder: hey, was that her plan all along? What should we do?" And someone said: "Okay, we need to have audio prepared of Charlie saying he wanted her to take over. And we'll tell them it was just a totally normal casual donor question that he said all the time — he was constantly thinking about dying at 31 and Erika taking over. And then we'll release the audio, and then we'll do some PR. We're going to have Erika interviewed and she'll tackle that question head-on. Seem like she is being forthright. Someone will ask her, 'Hey, why the sudden 180?' And she'll give a perfect, sensible answer."
Which I should mention she tried to do at the New York Times Book Summit when someone raised it. Take a listen.
Interviewer: "You've urged, as he has, women not to delay building families."
Erika Kirk: "I beg your pardon."
Interviewer: "You have urged women not to delay having families—"
Erika Kirk: "Right."
Interviewer: "And you've talked about serving your husband—"
Erika Kirk: "Well, he's served me also. He would ask, 'How can I serve you?' We would ask it to each other."
Interviewer: "And a number of them said, 'Ask her, please ask her — how do you think about your career now that you're going to be taking over Turning Point and balancing family, and what your view is of that?'"
Erika Kirk: "No, it's a great question. It's actually a very thoughtful question. I grew up with a mother who was an entrepreneur. It was her and I. My parents got divorced when I was very young, when I was five. True. And I saw that as a blueprint. So that does not scare me — being a single mom, if you will, now, and running a company. There really is no such thing as balance. There's always going to be a give and take. But what this grieving process has taught me is that there is really no blueprint of what I'm going through. It's really a one-of-one type of situation. And it's interesting because when you view how pain can be morphed into a form of purpose that you see will outlive you — again, it puts into perspective that this isn't about me. This isn't about my life. This is about the legacy my husband left behind. But it's also about how we're fighting the good fight for our country. And when it comes to career, I will be fully transparent. I was fully bought into the boss babe. I mean, I lived in Manhattan. Charlie essentially plucked me out of the New York City orbit and was like, 'I have a healthier way of viewing things and looking at life.' And he was right. He was right. I remember thinking — if I would have stayed on that path I was on, I would have lost out on some of the most beautiful moments of my life. Children, having a husband, being able to create and build something so incredible. And again, yes, balance is an illusion. I bring my children to the office. I have them with me constantly. We have a phenomenal team. It doesn't just fall on my shoulders. Charlie was very good about creating and intentionally building a machine where it turns from founder to vision-led. And he shared everything with me. I knew his goals. I knew what his vision was. So this is not out of my orbit. This is not uncomfortable for me. And it's not because I'm picking up a mantle that I understand and that I know — that Charlie has entrusted to me, the team has entrusted to me, the Lord has entrusted to me — and I take that very seriously."
Candace Owens: So many words used to say nothing, to not answer the question. She did what's referred to as the DC dip and twirl. If they give you a question you don't like, just keep talking and hope that people forgot the question that was initially asked — which is: "Aren't you kind of a hypocrite?" That's the question. "Aren't you a little bit of a hypocrite doing this?" Well, there's so much happening. And Charlie. And I was in New York. And let me tell you a funny story about my mom in the third grade. No answer — because it is full and utter hypocrisy.
And again, it feels to me as though they had sort of prepped this. And I find it — am I wrong here? Do you guys agree? — it's a little suspicious that they love releasing videos, the books, everything of Charlie Kirk. And yet here they have on camera, allegedly, his dying wish for Erika to take over if he dies young at the age of 31 — which he then happened to do three weeks later — and they don't want to release it. And they're angry if you ask. You're a brandishing psychopathic subway killer. Seems a little suspicious. I'm going to leave it at that.
Investigating Erika Kirk's Whereabouts on September 10th
And before I tell you something that's even more suspicious — I did a lot of research into her day-of alibi, that she was with her mother. And I want to put out some feelers for you and let you know what we have discovered.
All right, you guys. Let's get into Erika's story regarding her whereabouts on September 10th. We've already established that Erika pivots and edits, and then a bunch of people come out to protect her. She's got money. She'll get the PR to come. But I tend to agree, having looked into her background and her story and the manner in which she lies — I tend to agree with the opinion shared by Elizabeth Lane that Erika has psychopathic tendencies.
By the way, Blake, looking back at you, buddy — I'm not the one who had an employer allegedly shot in front of my face and didn't think to call 911. I feel like that's a little psychopathic. Kind of just running to the back with Mikey, and Mikey calls his wife and you call your mom, and no one calls 911. Walking away calmly — that's psychopathic vibes. Going into the casket with your chief donor lady — that's a little psychopathic. I don't know. I'm not Sigmund Freud. I'm not into the Kabbalah and 33rd degree Masonry. But that felt to me a little psychopathic.
Anyway, regarding Erika's whereabouts on September 10th — I want to be super clear at first that I am not questioning whether or not Erika's mother has an illness. That has never been what I have been investigating. I have said many times — it's been a discussion. I think Erika has even herself talked about her mother's Lyme disease in different settings.
The reason why this is even significant is because it's a part of Erika's story — whether or not she was with her mother as she says on September 10th when she received the news from Mikey McCoy that Charlie was shot. Because I cannot ignore my gut feeling that a person who will have the chief fundraiser record you grieving over your husband — they've got some tendencies. Some tendencies to use emotion to manipulate people.
And there was something that felt off to me when I learned, after Charlie's assassination, the timing of her post two days prior to Charlie being shot. She posts this video of her mother looking tremendously frail and sick on the 8th, despite the fact that she had not posted her mother in years. It feels manipulative to me. It feels like providing the public with an unimpeachable boundary. Like: look at my mother in this state. Anything that I say that is attached to my clearly ailing mother cannot and should not be questioned, because that would be immoral. Again — manipulative. Highly manipulative, especially to post something like that without details. There's nobody worse on Instagram than people who post themselves with an arm in an IV and put a verse and give you no further details. It's just a cry for attention. It's never normal to do that without any details. And it also, in the context of Erika, makes it so that people will just fill in the blanks and assume the worst — assume that maybe her mother is terminal.
So we were initially told about Erika's whereabouts on September 10th — or at least this was the earliest I can remember. I'm sure Turning Point USA was doing the rounds on the news, but I was not watching the news at that time. Erika sat down with the New York Times just days following the assassination, welcomed them into her and Charlie's apartment. And here is what they published verbatim. They wrote:
"It had been Miss Kirk's plan to accompany her husband to Utah, but her mother would be undergoing medical treatment in the Phoenix area that same day. 'Home needs you,' Mr. Kirk told her. They agreed that she would instead travel with him on the next leg of the tour to Colorado State University."
So they're already setting up right there — the whole reason she wasn't there was because her mother is so sick and she needed to be there. It continues:
"Miss Kirk was sitting in her mother's hospital room at 11:23 a.m. local time in Phoenix when she saw the number of her husband's longtime assistant, Michael McCoy, appear on her phone. In retrospect, she said she knew the words 'He's been shot' before Mr. McCoy screamed them."
Kind of weird. Not every day somebody gets shot — a political figure. That just seems very strange to me. But that's her story. They said "the hospital" — and we're going to have to assume now that this reporter is just writing whatever they want, the most crucial details, and for whatever reason we have a scenario where no one's moving to correct them. That was the established narrative. She was in a hospital. So it was like this double whammy — she not only lost her husband, but she was being this doting daughter, standing by her mother's side while her mother gets treatment and looks like she might be dying. Again, these are psych games.
Then we heard straight from Erika in November, a little more detail, during her sit-down with Jesse Watters. Here is what she told us.
Jesse Watters: "How did you find out Charlie had been shot?"
Erika Kirk: "Was at my mom's doctor's appointment. I have my phone and I see the video come in of him flinging out the hats."
Jesse Watters: "And I said, 'Mom, look, it's starting.'"
Erika Kirk: "So we saw the hats being flung. I put my phone down, and it was on silent, so I had no reason to look back at it. Moved my mom. I went back to grab my phone, and that's when Mikey started calling me. Called me within seconds. 'He's been shot. Get the kids. Get security. Get the kids. Get the kids. He's been shot.' I sprinted out of her treatment center. Just collapsed in the middle of the parking lot. Called our security."
Jesse Watters: "Unbelievable nightmare."
Candace Owens: Okay, a little bit more there. She got the call from Mikey. She collapses in a parking lot. Also — and I was just speaking to Skyler, he has like a producer's eye for this stuff — I think I noticed a cut, actually, because there were so many bizarre jump cuts in this interview. If you go back and watch it, clearly a lot of editing went into it. And there's this bizarre jump cut right when she says "I was at my mother's medical appointment" — and then it looks like they kind of patched it. But can you just play the beginning again?
Jesse Watters: "How did you find out Charlie had been shot?"
Erika Kirk: "Was at my mom's doctor's appointment. I have my phone and I see the video come in of him—"
Candace Owens: Anyway. The place in question. So then I started prodding, asking people. I was like, "Well, that's a pretty big event, right? A woman collapsing in a parking lot on a day that will live in infamy. Everyone will remember where they were when they learned that Charlie Kirk had been shot. That's how big of an event this was. This is like 9/11. I can tell you exactly where I was during 9/11. I can tell you exactly where I was when Charlie got shot. And this is everyone. It has never been seen before — to watch somebody bleed out in that way. It spread like fire.
So even if you were someone who did not know who Erika Kirk was — if you got the news that Charlie had been shot and you then realized, oh my gosh, I must have seen Erika Kirk because I was in my car in that massive parking lot and I saw a woman collapse and she had blonde hair — like, that's what I'm looking for. There should have been a lot of eyewitnesses to this scene of a woman collapsing. It also would require, of course, if you collapse in a parking lot, that the nurses are going to come out, escort you back in. How are you going to get from that parking lot? Are they going to call the police? Who knows?
So then I determined that the place in question is not a hospital at all. There's no way that anyone would describe it as a hospital. It would be more appropriately described as an IV therapy place. If you were going to compare it to anything, it is a holistic clinic — which is a good thing. I'm all for holistic medicine. But it is not by any stretch of the imagination a hospital. And for sure Erika's mother has in the past received treatments there. I was able to determine that factually. She had in fact gone in for a treatment two days earlier, on September 8th, because people sent me records of that. I didn't ask for them. They sent it. I didn't ask anybody to violate HIPAA or whatever. But I can confirm she was there on September 8th.
Witness Accounts and the Unraveling Alibi
Now, regarding the 10th — a very strange thing occurred. We had put out an APB: anybody that can confirm this, I'm looking for anybody in the parking lot, somebody that works there, somebody that maybe works adjacent to it. Please tell us. Send us tips. And what we received was a flurry of text messages from various nurses and people who are friends and family of nurses, who alleged initially that Erika was at this place when she got the news, and that she had collapsed in the parking lot. So I thought: great, now I'm getting closer. And in some of these messages they said the nurses had to carry her inside. Great.
But then when we pushed further, we kept finding that the story fell through the cracks. Meaning that everyone involved had heard it from someone else. So you'd get a nurse — this nurse was there. We'd prod that nurse. "Oh, no, actually, I've just followed up with her and now she's saying it was her colleague nurse who was there." Okay, we find the colleague nurse. This colleague nurse said this. "Oh, actually, hers is not first person either. It's another nurse." We were just going around in circles. Everyone thinks another nurse saw it. Did it happen, or were they all told that it happened here?
And the more we pushed, at long last we arrived at a more solidified story — or at least it appeared ostensibly like a more solidified story. They said: "You know what, Erika was there, but she was in a meeting with the lead doctor in his office." Suddenly, her mother had been completely removed from the story. Nobody would confirm Lori in the story.
Now, the doctor in question — who I'm not going to name at this moment because we just went out with him and we feel confident in what we have been able to pull together — he and his wife are involved in politics in a big way. Federal politics, I would say. And that is of some interest to me. On the other side of things, he and his wife told friends that Erika was in their office with a friend. To be clear — not with her mother, but with a friend.
We also have a person who has come forward and claims that Erika was with her security guard, Derek Nikkerk, when she got the news — with her security guard — and they were explicit: she was not with her mother.
And lastly, we were given the name of a woman from Dassel, Minnesota, who has claimed that she — and not Erika — was with Lori when Lori got the news that her son-in-law had been shot.
I would like to stress here that across all of these testimonies, Erika and Lori are not together. I am again going to decline to name that woman in Minnesota because we have reached out for comment. Suffice it to say that when we combine all these testimonies, the common theme — the common denominator — is that Erika and Lori were apart on September 10th.
So a couple of questions. Did the doctor just say: "You could say you were here. This will be an airtight alibi. I own the office. We're friends. I can establish some connections between Turning Point USA and his wife, where his wife works." That's one narrative running in my mind — did they just say, "We'll say you were here, and I will tell the nurses that you were here, and that's how this all spread like wildfire"? But no nurse was actually able to confirm that they themselves were there. We'll start the rumor, if you will, that you were here. That's one option.
Another option is she was actually there — not with her mother, but with Derek Nikkerk — and in his office for some reason taking a meeting. That's another option.
But I feel, on the basis of the legwork that we have done, and how far we have investigated this, and the people we have spoken to with intimate knowledge — and of course the lack of any eyewitness to a woman collapsing in a parking lot on such a day that is eternally downloaded in all of our minds — I feel it is very fair for me to state that I do not believe Erika was with her mother on that day. I believe that was a part of a narrative that was pre-sold to us and packaged, beginning actually on September 8th with her post of her mother in a frail state.
We will keep pushing. If you have any more information pertaining to what I just shared, please email us at moretips@candaceowens.com.
Pam Bondi's Firing — The Real Reason
Okay. Lastly, I do want to honorably mention that Pam Bondi was fired. Trump made the announcement on social media, saying:
"Pam Bondi is a great American patriot, a loyal friend who faithfully served as my attorney general over the past year. Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown on crime across the country, with murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900. We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much-needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future. And our deputy attorney general and a very talented and respected legal mind, Todd Blanche, will step in to serve as acting attorney general. Thank you for your attention to this matter. President Donald J. Trump."
Now, people initially thought this must be related to her fumbling the Epstein files so hard. No. Her and Trump are on the same team when it comes to the Epstein files. Please do not put that on Pam Bondi. Pam Bondi was doing as she was instructed to do by Trump, by Trump's orbit of friends who are all in the Epstein files. They protected the Epstein files together. If that were the case, Kash Patel would be gone too. It was under her watch and under Kash Patel's watch that the Epstein files got released. And don't forget — because it kind of happened over Christmas and they never really discussed it — that during that release, they even released a deepfake video of Jeffrey Epstein in his cell committing suicide. Do you guys remember this? This was kind of a blip because it all happened on December 23rd, a couple of days before Christmas. Most people were on break. They released a fake video, they got clocked on the fake video, then they removed the fake video and refused to comment on it.
Because Jeffrey Epstein is clearly alive. He is alive. It was an Israeli operation to get him out of there. It's the reason why the New York Post had the exclusive photos and the story. The New York Post, for all intents and purposes, is just a Mossad outfit. They work on behalf of Israel. The New York Post exclusively finds Ghislaine Maxwell every single time. It's the New York Post.
So yeah, this is not the reason she's being fired. We then learn actually that the reason Trump fired her is because he's upset with her — he believes that she is the one who tipped off Eric Swalwell regarding an investigation into his relationship. You know, he was dating the Chinese spy girl. Apparently the FBI was preparing a bunch of documents relating to his relationship with Christine Fang, and Trump believes that she intervened and tipped him off. And he was angry with her. So it's like: you're not loyal to me. Even though she's like, "Hey, I kind of backed you up on Jeffrey Epstein." But you know how Trump is. You're in or you're out. And if you don't worship the ground he walks on and do everything he says, then you've got to go.
So Trump needs a better dog, essentially. And she is sleazy, obviously. And so I don't know why you're shocked — they're all sleazy. Everybody is sleazy post-Epstein. But don't get excited, guys. It certainly is not related to Trump doing the right thing. Don't be confused and think that he did the right thing and realized that they fumbled the Epstein ball — even though that's how they're going to want to play it to the public, because the other part sounds much more petty. And that's why it's buried deep in all the articles about what happened with Eric Swalwell.
So I wanted you guys to know that everything is still tremendously fake and we are being ruled by people who deem themselves to be elites but are actually kind of just deranged and disgusting.
Viewer Comments
Candace Owens: All right, you guys. Top comment from yesterday's episode came from Chewing the Void. He wrote: "They really said, let's run the JFK model one more time and expected nobody to notice." Like, down to a tee. Same players involved, same country involved, same reason involved. Israel wants something. And they were like, "Let's do this. Let's bring back the bullet comparative bullet analysis thing and no one will notice. We discontinued it because we needed it then, and we need it again."
And there's actually more evidence — or you could say the same amount of evidence, an absence of evidence — that Charlie was even shot. There's no evidence Charlie was even shot, because it doesn't make sense. They're saying we cut him open, went into his stomach, and you got one little fragment. Is that the new story they're telling? First it was the bullet. Okay, it fragmented. There should be a lot of fragments. I am looking forward to the defense getting the files from the ATF that they are requesting — not just a summary, but the actual files, the pictures, the photos. I want to see what it is that they are claiming was found in Charlie's thorax. And the story changes all the time. It's like every — little edits. "Mikey called me within seconds." Oh, actually, no. Mikey did not call you within seconds. Mikey called his wife. It seems like they were kind of already on the phone, and then he three-wayed you minutes later. Why is everybody just slightly adjusting? Why did nobody mention his wife before that? Kind of left Elizabeth McCoy out of the story, and then suddenly: "Oh, actually, there's one more thing." Did Charlie train Mikey McCoy to call his wife? That was the initial narrative. They had to edit it after. "Mikey did exactly what he was supposed to do. He was amazing. He didn't call 911. He turned around, did what Charlie wanted him to do. He called his wife." And we're not supposed to notice all of these slight little edits. I notice. I'm keeping track, keeping a list. I've got some more tricks up my sleeve.
The second most-liked comment came from We Writer. He wrote: "Trump is implying someone is jealous of Erika because they are investigating her husband's assassination." What a strange statement. You put it that way — why do you want to know who killed Charlie? You're just jealous of Erika. Stop. We're just hot. Yeah, you're just jealous. That's why you want to know who killed her husband — because you're jealous. Guys, you've got to work on the messaging.
Also, then there's the clip going around of Trump reading his speech being like, "Charlie loved Erika very much." I had such a chuckle about that, because in particular, Charlie was so good at maneuvering with the White House. He always had an in with Trump's speechwriter. So he would tell them, "Please save a sentence" — if there was something he wanted to promote, like when we were promoting Blexit. And so Trump did not write that. Obviously the speechwriter did, which means somebody — probably not him, maybe Stacy Sheridan or somebody — was like, "Hey, could you put this in the speech? Put in the speech that Charlie loved Erika." And that's why Trump looks down at his paper. He's like, "Charlie loved Erika very much." Trump doesn't write his own speeches, guys. So that is highly embarrassing. Highly embarrassing that you view something that should have so much substance as a talking point that will somehow bear more weight if the President of the United States says it. It actually diminishes it. You shouldn't need Trump to say that your husband loved you. That's weird. Everything is so backward and weird in terms of what they are doing, and we all feel it and we all see it.
Okay, comments for today's episode. O writes: "Hi Blake, please show a trusted third party — like Megyn, or our beloved Tucker — and let them verify or deny for the public on their good word. Since you guys don't trust Candace and a portion of our viewers do not trust you, we need to know. Or just release it." What does it actually have to do with me? You guys made the promise. You put out the narrative. You guys played it as her walkout music. Usually people just pick a song. You picked Dead Man's Dying Wish as her walkout music. So let's go. Drop the video. Stop trying to make it seem like this is a strange request. Our entire basis of what we're doing relies on us telling people this is what Charlie wanted. Okay, prove it. We don't need a third party. Do it. Put it on your show. I dare you.
Jen Hens writes: "Candace, you are one of the few podcasters that I admire. You speak your truth even if it's not popular and you call out nonsense despite backlash from low-IQ outfits. Your courage inspires me to bring more of that into my own life. Bless you and happy Easter." Yes, you guys. Happy Easter. He is risen. Christ is king. He wins.
Czechmino writes: "Hey Candace, compared to a subway knife psycho — Tim Dylan hears that and just cackles. It's a real knife fight out here. A friend of the show knows. Bring facts or bring a bigger blade. Keep carving legends." Yeah, I laughed so hard because he's just so unhinged. You can just tell he's very emotionally immature. Somebody tweeted something so funny about his mannerisms — they were basically saying that whenever he speaks, it's like the lie is trying to escape him. He's so uncomfortable. He jitters. The lie doesn't even want to be there. And Blake really does have that demeanor. He's like a child or something. It's just strange to me.
Seven Sheets writes: "TPUSA understands that they cannot replace Charlie, a one-of-a-kind innovator who led with authenticity, compassion, and transparency. Notably, he saw that in you. Not one comes close to filling the shoes of that man. Happy Easter, and God bless you." Happy Easter. And I so agree. He led with authenticity and compassion and transparency. And honesty. He was honest about himself, his flaws. He did make mistakes. It's so stupid that they're trying to turn him into — are you saying that Charlie made mistakes all the time? I argued with him about his mistakes. He argued with me about mine. We opened up to each other about our mistakes, our flaws. He was a human being. So it's so weird. That's one of the strangest arguments. "Are you saying he could have hired someone who in the end stabbed him in the back?" Yeah. $100 million coming. Yeah, I'm saying that. I am saying that. Remember me as having said that.
Lauren Brown writes: "It's like watching the scene from Bridesmaids where she gives the toast — to Erika's answer at the New York Times Book Summit." It just goes on and on, my friends. She just keeps going. I don't know if the PR was in the back like, "Just shut up. Just stop speaking." Or if they were like, "Just keep speaking. Don't stop. They'll forget where they are." Don't know. Honestly, with Andrew Kolvet, probably the latter.
Hot Mess Mom writes: "Why was everyone talking about Charlie dying? I remember a podcast of someone asking him what he wanted to be remembered for, and he said, 'If I die' — and he responded, for his faith. It was sketchy." During the Iced Coffee Hour podcast, he said, "I want to be remembered for courage, for my faith. That would be the most important thing. The most important thing is my faith." I do find it weird how much they are saying that Charlie thought about dying, and then when he actually said the night before, "They're going to kill me," they were like, "Oh no, Charlie was great. He was so excited. No, never had that thought ever." There's just so many things they say that conflict with one another.
I find it — like I said — based off of my own experience, of which I have a lot raising money with Turning Point USA, I have never heard that question asked from a donor ever. Highly unusual. And by the way, for the people that were at the event, they said what they remembered — which is much more logical — is that after Charlie gave his presentation, a donor woman from North Carolina asked him, "That's a lot. You're doing a lot. You're planning on growing this way. You're one person. How are you going to do it all?" To which he then said something about Steve Jobs and how these people hire lieutenants who they trust — "We hire people that are going to be able to take control of different departments. It's not just me. I'm not just one guy. I hire people that I trust."
Guess who he had not hired in that moment? Erika. So how did we then jump to the edit of him saying "Erika"? Like, are they editing a joke he made at a different time? Because there's an edit. That's an edit. We hear an edit there. It would be good if we could see it. Please release it. Put pressure on Turning Point USA to release this tape. Everyone should do this. Everyone should put pressure on Turning Point USA to release the tape as they promised. They promised unseen footage. Well, this is some footage that is unseen that we would like to see.
And I also want to tell you guys — obviously we're going off for a week. We have tons to investigate. I will put out more APBs. If you know anything about Erika's whereabouts on September 10th, we want to hear from you. More tips at moretips@candaceowens.com. Lori's whereabouts on September 10th — we think we're pretty close to nailing her down. We still want to hear from you.
And also want to mention — just when we went live, I heard about Judge Liman throwing out an entire portion of Justin Baldoni's case, Blake Lively's case against him for sexual harassment. And I'm having the best week ever. What can I say? I am having the best week ever. I just have like extra sauce and glitter and balloons on me. I am glowing this week. I don't know what's happening, but this week is about me. This should have been my birthday. My birthday's not for weeks, but this should have been my birthday week. I am so upset it wasn't, because it feels like it. I'm just racking up the wins.
Strong week for Candace Owens supporters. Justice ultimately being served. You go, Justin Baldoni. That is my cousin, you know, and he knows — we're this close to getting the kombucha. Did I tell you guys the fun update? He's moving here to Tennessee. I know why he's moving here. No one has figured this out. He's moving here because eventually he wants to get kombucha with me. So congratulations, Justin Baldoni. The sexual assault claims were insane. Women be crazy, yo. That's been the theme of the last year. Women be crazy, yo. Very crazy. I would say Blake Lively was grieving differently too after her alleged sexual assault — she was grieving differently by trying to take over a whole movie. Seems like women have been trying to stage some hostile takeovers as of late. I'm just putting the pieces together. Women be crazy, yo.