Gary

"He was fearful of being shot by law enforcement" We should all be infuriated that this imbecilic little pansy-ass was suddenly worried about being shot, after appointing himself judge, jury and executioner of Charlie Kirk. youtu.be/LtdfXxK1sXw?si…

@NJBeisner Should have used the word captures instead of footage.

I believe some of the confusion stems from Frank saying he showed Charlie what he assumed at the time was drone footage, but it was actually pictures from a 360 degree stationary camera up high. Frank later corrected the record on this simple misunderstanding. If I remember correctly.

Yesterday, Candace repeated a lie that myself and others debunked back in November. She claims Brian Harpole and Frank Turek told conflicting stories about whether or not TPUSA had a drone up that day. In actuality, Brian Harpole DOES also mention the fact that there was a drone up that day at UVU. His story aligns with Frank Turek’s. It wasn’t security’s drone, and nobody ever said it was. But see, Candace never actually watched the full Shawn Ryan interview with Brian Harpole. She just watched clips her audience fed her. She’s sloppy and doesn’t do her due diligence. Either that, or she’s knowingly cutting out the part where Brian mentions that a drone was in fact up; it just wasn’t security’s. See my video from November below for more.

@none_ya1776 @Scout1712 Ironic comment from someone with such a user name. 🤣

@Scout1712 Erika is a lying ditz and a puppet. A literal robot. She always said mom's should stay home and raise their kids....magically she is proud to be a single Mom because her "mom" was a single mom (both have been debunked). It's gross and she needs to go home and fade away.

Show me anywhere, prove me wrong, where Charlie Kirk told people that if a husband dies their wife should stop staying at home with their young children and become a CEO. There was a life insurance plan in place for 10s of millions of dollars. He made sure Erika would never have to work and could stay home and be with their children. Prove me wrong.

Preponderaversia: The irrational aversion to accepting the preponderance of the evidence against the perpetrator of a high-profile crime, along with the insistence on substituting an unrelated suspect or suspects more ideologically comforting, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.

@GrahamAllen None of you care about Charlie’s killer, doing everything to hide the fact that you are trying to send a innocent man to jail

Candace Owens is a LIAR! She spent weeks attacking Mikey McCoy making him a target from her cult to where he could barely live his life!!!! Now she expects us to believe HE was her LEAKER the whole time?!?!

Preponderaversia: The irrational aversion to accepting the preponderance of the evidence against the perpetrator of a high-profile crime, along with the insistence on substituting an unrelated suspect or suspects more ideologically comforting, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.

Welp, it’ll probably go into 2028, by which point I hope our crowdsourced investigation has a solid theory. Candace has been sued many, many times and she knows how this works. @baroncoleman broke down the ridiculous lawsuit Harpole filed against Candace and I think it will be thrown out. Baron’s show is absolutely worth a watch—he’s a lawyer with 20+ years experience. I agree with Candace on the French First “Lady”. 🤷🏻‍♀️

@culturewarnotes 😴😴😂 👋

Erika is a narcissist, so there's no real reason to speak to her. There aren't any Jews, so they cannot be blamed for anything at all. Not a huge fan of Candace. She works her work, I mine. I admit to being a huge nerd about "innocent until proven guilty". So that's absolutely on point. Thank you for pointing that out. That's independent confirmation from a hostile source that I absolutely stand behind the rule of law. Yes, believing in US law and order, and having a good detector for grifters and con artists like Erika is a gift for which I do not desire a cure. Thank you for your interest, son. Now, go take your nap.

People say it is unfair to speak out against Erika Kirk because she "continues the work of her husband." Ok, name one video, blog, or podcast she has done in which she has directly championed any of the points her late husband promoted, such as: 1) insisting the US should not get involved in war with Iran 2) calling out Jewish donors who are trying to control the right-wing blogosphere 3) questioning the official Israeli narrative about what happened on October 7. 4) Promoting Charlie's positions on gun control or 2A rights. 5) Promotes Charlie's economic policies 6) Repeats Charlie's stance on election integrity and voter fraud Then explain why a woman would take her assassinated husband's position, knowing she could also be assassinated and thereby leave her children fully orphans. Provide links to commentary from Charlie that indicates he would support a woman doing that to his children. Explain where the Bible promotes a woman who chooses assassination over motherhood. Erika has vowed to make TPUSA “10 times better." Comment on what she is implicitly saying about the way Charlie ran TPUSA. Erika has said she has to work to support her kids, even though it is documented fact that Charlie left her at least $10 million in cash and estates. Comment on what she is implicitly saying about Charlie's financial competence when she publicly says she has to work.

You're welcome to write a letter to Erika and let her know your concerns about issues being discussed. But as far as all your personal and rather offensive questions I doubt you'd get an answer. Why? Because it's none of your business. And, the notion that she or anyone at TPUSA is somehow responsible for Charlie's death is ridiculous on its face. I've perused your timeline, and I have a likely diagnosis for you: Zionitis - uncontrollable compulsion to blame Israel or Jews for everything bad in the world. Main cause: too much exposure to other sufferers of the disease.  It's extremely contagious. Candyabetes - state of excess sugar circulating to the brain, cutting off specific synaptic pathways necessary for rational critical thinking.  Main cause: too much exposure to Candace Owens' hypnotic rambling speech, wildly waving arms and darting eyes. This particular strain of diabetes is unfortunately uniquely contagious, as well. Preponderaversia: The irrational aversion to accepting the preponderance of the evidence against the suspected perpetrator of a high-profile crime, along with the insistence on substituting an unrelated suspect or suspects more ideologically comforting, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.  Also extremely contagious. These conditions are often found to coexist within sufferers.  If you have one, you're very likely to have the others. Researchers are working furiously to find a cure, before they themselves become infected, rendering them unable to navigate normal avenues of evidence and common sense, and subsequently blaming Israel for their condition. Warning: Unaffected observers of individuals with these conditions may suffer serious scalp abrasions caused by excessive head scratching.

By the way, when does Erika's "I'm a poor widow" card expire? Trump's "I nearly got assassinated" card only lasted a couple of months and he never really used it. I mean, I don't remember him sobbing hysterically at the WHC dinner and begging to be taken home. Instead, the man who had part of his ear blown off with a bullet refused to leave the table because he wanted to watch what was happening, and he wanted the dinner to go on, because he had some good jokes to crack after the shooter got taken down. I'm pretty sure Charlie would have had a similar reaction. Competent leaders aren't thrown off by a few random gunshots. Also, why are you so interested in redirecting away from Charlie's points? Nobody seems to want to engage or "honor" Charlie's talking points. Here's a reminder of a few of them: 1) the US should not get involved in war with Iran 2) Jewish donors who are trying to control the right-wing blogosphere 3) the official Israeli narrative on October 7 is sus. 4) Charlie's opposition to gun control 5) Charlie's emphasis on economic policies 6) Charlie's stance on election integrity and voter fraud Why isn't Erika promoting the SAVE Act, for instance?

@CupEmpty @BriannaWu Yes thanks I was aware of that.

@gary5776 @BriannaWu Brianna is a man wearing women’s identity.

I’m sorry someone said you shouldn’t be CEO. But one of those people was your late husband. Charlie Kirk said women should “embrace their roles as mothers and homemakers.” He said that for women, having children was more important than a career. And he said women getting jobs instead of getting married led to “political hysteria.”

Tpusa didn't have drones up. Frank Turek was looking at shots from a ground based 360 degree camera he mistook for drone footage. He's talked about it. They may have been allowed to put up a drone briefly before the event for publicity shots but drones weren't allowed during the event.

@bertha_b83724 @WildManZig @TheMissyLerch As far as the lies on the show, he lied about the drone usage that day. He said he couldn’t legally fly drones, yet TPUSA had drones up shooting footage. He was misleading in his statements about conversations with local law enforcement.

I read through the lawsuit against Candace Owens and Mitchell Snow brought by Brian Harpole. The similarities to the defamation case against Karen Read and Turtleboy are uncanny. I mean, it felt like I was reading the same lawsuit. “Owen’s describes herself as as an “investigative journalist” “Owen’s regularly used her podcast and X account to promote conspiracy theories” “These platforms are monetized. The more followers she has the more views her content received, the more money she makes” “She is not subject to any oversight or professional ethics” Owen’s attempted to contact Harpole to “explain his side”. She used his silence to further her viewership and defamation against him. Same components: 1) Defamation 2) Conspiracy 3) Aiding and Abetting The lawsuit addresses public vs. private individuals as well. “He did not seek publicity” “His participation in the controversy was limited to defending statements made against him.” “Two podcast appearances” And, similarly, Candace Owens, is saying she is glad she is being sued because, you guessed it, the discovery phase🤣🤣🤣🤣

She could, but she's not obligated to, except in your own mind. She is. How would you have done in similar circumstances? I think you're suffering from an inferiority complex. You know you'd have been jello on the floor. I know I'd have been. She's better than both of us. She's honoring Charlie way above and beyond what most would have. She's never dissed him, and never would or will. What are you even talking about? No, you're a joke. Pretending to be all about "innocent until proven" while at the same time bashing an innocent widow for no other reason than you've got inner hate to vent. What's really going on with you dude? Share with the group.

@gary5776 Honey, nobody CAN answer those questions, INCLUDING ERIKA. She is not competent. That's pretty obvious at this point. She's also not honoring Charlie. She keeps dissing him publicly to raise herself up. She's a joke.

Nobody's obligated to answer your questions, least of all Erika. You're welcome to ask, but it looks like I'm the only one wasting my time attempting to explain to you why it's none of your business, just hers. Now you're going back to your previous questions, all the while avoiding addressing the reality of the preponderance of evidence against Tyler. Simply give us your case on that, and stop hiding behind red herrings.

We don't know what Tyler did or did not do. That's what the trial is for. The ballistics are - as the filing said - inconclusive. I am patient. I am the one who keeps saying we have no right to rush to judgement, we cannot assume the man is guilty until the evidence is presented. Everyone is attacking me for being patient, so it's kind of tone-deaf for you to urge me to be what you are not. You also rush to judgement about what I "really mean." Tyler is a mentally disturbed freak, a homosexual furry, a man who should have been institutionalized long ago so he could get treatment to become sexually normal. If the members of the LGBTQ+ community were institutionalized, as was the practice in decades past, the world would be a better place. That said, even a mentally disturbed freak like him deserves a fair trial without being judged guilty by assholes like you.

Don't call me an asshole dude. You're the one injecting your uninformed opinion about how Erika should conduct herself, and acting as uninformed junior deputy of the Tyler Robinson investigation. You're still not being honest about your opinion on Tyler's guilt. Forget the whole "innocent until proven guilty" red herring, tell us what you really think. This is a test. What level of critical thinking ability do you possess? Are you an honest broker, or an "asshole?"

No, Tyler is not on the level of craziness as George Zinn. Tyler seems to have considered his actions, and decided to go about what it took to carry out his demented wishes, planned for at least weeks. Zinn is on the level of the local homeless person claiming the moon landings didn't happen, like Candace. You've acknowleded what we know so far about the firearms balistics. 30 calibur consistent. Thank you. The rest will come at the trial. Be patient. You're hiding behind this whole "rule of law" red herring, which of course we all agree with, while at the same time functioning as junior partner in the internet slop Tyler Defense Team. We've all read your timeline. We know what you're really all about. It's obvious you really do care about Tyler being guilty or not. You're pulling for him, contrary to the preponderance of the evidence, aren't you?

Yes, George Zinn is crazy. Do you mean to imply Tyler Robinson is sane??? It doesn't matter: a confession, by itself, is not conclusive. People are innocent until proven guilty. As for the bullet, there is no bullet fragment match. ATF ballistics analysis of a deformed bullet jacket fragment recovered from Kirk’s autopsy was inconclusive. A later-unsealed ATF report (April 2026) confirmed the spent casing matched the rifle. The bullet jacket fragment was CONSISTENT with .30 caliber (matching the rifle’s chambering), but not a direct match. I don't actually care if Tyler is guilty or not. The point of my positions are to demonstrate I adhere to the rule of law. He has to be found guilty or innocent according to the rule of law. We don't get to say he is guilty until he gets convicted. That's how the rule of law works.

@realsashastone Good instincts Sasha. Continuing to follow you.

To any Conservative following me who supporters Tucker and Candace in your attacks against Trump, please unfollow me. Thanks.

George Zinn has been proven to be a crazy nutcase, evidenced by his prior injections into high profile events. Nothing burger. There IS a match between a bullet fragment and a 30 caliber class gun. Do you still cling to the notion that this rules out the 30-06 gun tied to Tyler? Please explain. Who do you think killed Charlie? That's the question you've still not answered, "honey" And of course, he's innocent until proven guilty. He very well may go the way of O.J.

I hold the absolutely INSANE view that a man is innocent until proven guilty. I have noted there is no match between the bullet and the gun. I have noted that a confession is not sufficient evidence to convict by itself, or George Zinn would already be in jail for the murder of Charlie Kirk. Point out which position is wrong. I will wait here. What the fuck business is it of yours if I choose to take an interest in TPUSA and Erika Kirk's incompetence? That's the question YOU need to get past before you question me again, honey.

"IF she had retired to a quiet life of raising Charlie's kids, I would say nothing." I very much doubt that. Seems to me, looking at your timeline, you're a Tyler denier. Which makes you untrustworthy regarding your honesty and critical thinking skills. I don't think you're an honest broker. I think you're just grifting. What the F business is it of yours what Ericka or TPUSA does? Why are you virtue signaling toward the stupid people in this debate? Who do you believe killed Charlie? That's the question you need to get past until you've gained any moral standing to question Erika. We're waiting.

So, explain her insistence that she is working because she is the sole provider for her family, and that she intends to make TPUSA "ten times better" than what Charlie built. How is either statement an example of either humility or her honoring her husband? How is taking a role that risks assassination a great way for a mother to care for her children? How is risking them being orphans at a very young age a Biblical principle? Where does the Bible say mothers should leave their children at home and seek out a role where an assassin may render those children orphans? And, no, she took a PUBLIC role, she CHOSE to put herself out there. IF she had retired to a quiet life of raising Charlie's kids, I would say nothing. But if she's choosing PUBLICITY, then she doesn't get a pass. There is NOTHING in what she is doing that lives out the Biblical principles Charlie espoused and Charlie thought he espoused when he married her.

@itsjenrbitches @kr44929 I can't help but think you're lying. But you really seem to want people to know you don't follow or listen. What game are you really playing here?

@gary5776 @kr44929 You don't have to follow Candace to know that 😅

Erika Kirk needs help with her tone when addressing people. She always seems like she scolding everyone.

I used to think Andrew and the rest were right to ignore her. But now that war has essentially broken out and they've apparently decided to respond, here's my recommendation: Every day, invite Candace to come on live with them on their show in person in Phoenix (?). No deadlines, just an open invitation repeated daily. But stick to the in person at their studio part. Bring your questions, we'll have everyone you've been accusing of things present to answer them. I doubt she'd ever agree to it. If she refuses, she looks chicken. Keep repeating the invitation regardless. If she did accept, she'd get destroyed. Win-win.

I see YREFY is still a big sponsor, which is fabulous. Tell them they should never think of sponsoring @RealCandaceO WIREFY???? Love what you guys are doing @AndrewKolvet Keep going strong. You’re making a difference in many ways!

Thank you for admitting that Tyler Robinson killed Charlie. You passed that part of the fact test. But you flunked out on the maga part. He left behind whatever maga-tudes he may have once had, and we don't even really know what he may have once believed. "Robinson’s mother explained that over the last year or so, Robinson had become more political and had started to lean more to the left – becoming more pro-gay and trans-rights oriented. She stated that Robinson began to date his roommate, a biological male who was transitioning genders. This resulted in several discussions with family members, but especially between Robinson and his father, who have very different political views. In one conversation before the shooting, Robinson mentioned that Charlie Kirk would be holding an event at UVU, which Robinson said was a “stupid venue” for the event. Robinson accused Kirk of spreading hate." -- charging document And of course just the simple fact, which you admit, that he assassinated about the biggest representative of maga outside of Trump himself proves he wasn't maga. He hated Charlie, and Charlie was maga-max. So, you get a 50. That's an F in most gradebooks.

@gary5776 A magaPunk killed him ,Lee Harvey

Utah Valley University withdrew an invitation for Sharon McMahon to speak at commencement after backlash over her past comments about Charlie Kirk, citing "increased safety concerns." We answer some of the First Amendment questions raised by the situation.