Candace Owens has disputed Turning Point USA spokesperson Andrew Colvitt’s account of Charlie Kirk’s alleged final text message, claiming that his public statements differed from what he said to her privately after Kirk’s death. Colvet initially admitted he wasn’t sure who Kirk was referring to, but later claimed the message referred to leftists, Owens said. Colvet defended his position publicly, while the exchange reignited controversy over the circumstances surrounding Kirk’s final hours.
New questions have emerged about the events of Charlie Kirk’s final hours, after conservative commentator Candace Owens publicly challenged the assertions of Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Colvitt.
The crux of the argument is whether Colvet said something to Owens within a short period of Kirk’s death that he later changed in his public account.
The exchange ignited a new round of debate among conservatives, with both factions sticking to their own versions of events and online conversations increasing.
Candace Owens disputes Andrew Colvet’s account of Charlie Kirk’s alleged final script
The latest feud began after Colvet shared a post discussing Kirk’s views during the final year of his life. He wrote that the late founder of Turning Point USA increasingly focused on the rise of Islam in Western countries and suggested that the issue had become one of Kirk’s greatest concerns.Owens quickly responded, saying the public statement did not match what Colvitt had said to her privately in the immediate aftermath of Kirk’s death.
“That’s not what she told me. She specifically told me that he texted ‘they’re going to kill me’ the night before.”She went on to explain that she pressed him for more information at the time.“I asked you specifically who he was referring to, and you said ‘I’m not sure.’
This was less than 48 hours after his assassination.”Owens then wondered why his interpretation had changed.“Now are you sure he meant leftists?”Her comments immediately drew attention on social media, as supporters and critics debated the significance of the alleged conversation. While some supported Owens’ call for consistency, others defended Colvet’s interpretation of Kirk’s public statements.
Andrew Colvitt stands by his position as the debate continues
Colvet did not retract his previous comments. Instead, he continued to respond to users on X who challenged his version of events.According to his public responses, Kirk repeatedly expressed fears that “leftists will try to kill him.” Colvet repeated this claim while answering several users who questioned how he came to this conclusion.But she says that shortly after Kirk died, he had a conversation with her in which he said things that contradicted those public statements.
Her criticism was less about the broader political discussion and more about what she saw as a move in the recent alleged text message story.In this exchange neither Owens nor Colvet provided any additional evidence beyond their assertions. This means that the debate is still driven by competing personal accounts, rather than independently verified information.This dispute has once again brought Charlie Kirk’s death to the forefront of public discourse, highlighting ongoing divisions in conservative media. The dispute over the alleged final script has yet to be settled, with both sides remaining firm, and the story continues to garner a lot of attention around the web.
