Fresh questions have emerged over the events of Charlie Kirk’s final hours, after conservative commentator Candace Owens publicly challenged assertions by Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet. The crux of the argument is whether Kolvet said something to Owens within a short time of Kirk’s death, which he later changed in his public account. The exchange has ignited a fresh round of debate among conservatives, with both factions sticking to their own versions of events and online chatter growing.
Candace Owens disputes Andrew Kolvet’s account of Charlie Kirk’s alleged final text
The latest dispute began after Kolvet shared a post discussing Kirk’s views during the final year of his life. He wrote that the late Turning Point USA founder had increasingly focused on the rise of Islam in Western countries and suggested that issue had become one of Kirk’s biggest concerns.Owens quickly responded, arguing that the public statement did not match what she says Kolvet privately told her in the immediate aftermath of Kirk’s death.“This is not what you told me. You told me specifically that he texted ‘they are going to kill me’ the night before.”She continued by explaining that she had pressed him for more information at the time.“I specifically asked you who he was referring to and you said ‘I’m not sure.’ This was less than 48 hours after his assassination.”Owens then questioned why his interpretation appeared to have shifted.“Now you’re certain he meant leftists?”Her comments immediately drew attention on social media, where supporters and critics debated the significance of the alleged conversation. While some backed Owens’ call for consistency, others defended Kolvet’s interpretation of Kirk’s public statements.
Andrew Kolvet stands by his position as debate continues
Kolvet did not retreat from his earlier comments. Instead, he continued responding to users on X who challenged his version of events.According to his public replies, Kirk had repeatedly expressed concerns that “leftists were going to try and kill him.” Kolvet repeated that claim while answering several users who questioned how he reached that conclusion.But, she says, soon after Kirk died, he had a conversation with her in which he said things that contradicted those public remarks. Her criticism was less about the broader political discussion and more about what she sees as a move in the story of the alleged last text message.In this exchange neither Owens nor Kolvet offered any additional evidence beyond their own assertions. This means the debate is still driven by competing personal accounts, rather than independently verified information.The dispute has once more brought Charlie Kirk’s death to the forefront of public discourse, underscoring enduring fissures in conservative media. The row over the alleged final text is also far from settled, with both sides standing firm, and the story still getting plenty of mileage all over the web.
