Conservative commentator Candace Owens has publicly rebuked her longtime ally, President Donald J. Trump, again, this time for his silence over the investigation into the death of activist Charlie Kirk.
Owens is accusing the president of ignoring crucial questions and hinting at a larger cover-up.
Owens, who once praised Trump’s leadership and built her platform around conservative causes, took aim during a recent podcast episode, stating:
“I know spiritually, from the moment Charlie Kirk passed, that we were never going to get the full story from officials.”
She went further, suggesting Trump’s administration is “being quiet because of the pro-Israel lobby,” a claim tied to her broader theory that Kirk’s killing may have involved Israeli officials.
She cited as proof a Trump-posted AI image showing Kirk and Trump together under a Star of David symbol, which she interpreted as a sign that “the investigation into who murdered Charlie Kirk was officially over.”
The campaign of criticism marks a sharp departure from Owens’ earlier support for Trump. Though once a prominent Trump backer and “very smart thinker” in his own words, she has since clashed publicly with him on several occasions. She has described him as “a chronic disappointment” and admitted embarrassment over her past endorsements.
From Defender to Detractor
Owens’ critique lands in a broader context of her evolving relationship with Trump and conservative politics. Previously, she defended his policies and presented herself as a staunch MAGA ally. But over the last couple of months, she has voiced substantive pushback — particularly over Israel-related foreign policy and issues of free speech.
Her latest allegations are tied directly to Kirk’s death. On Sept. 10 2025, Kirk was fatally shot at a speaking event in Utah; a suspect was arrested, and law enforcement described the case as a standard homicide. Yet Owens rejects that narrative, arguing for a broader conspiratorial lens:
“The best way to honor Charlie Kirk is to figure out who killed him.”
She accuses Trump of participating in the subterfuge, by jumping to declare a national day of remembrance for Kirk instead of demanding a transparent investigation. Owens called that move a “holiday” being used to sweep the truth under the rug.
The Fallout and What’s at Stake
The resurgence of Owens’ theories comes at a time when conspiracy narratives are proliferating in conservative media. Outlets such as The Guardian label her as a key figure in disseminating such claims, not just about Kirk’s death, but broader questions involving Israel and U.S. policy.
Her pivot away from Trump poses dual risks: it potentially alienates parts of the base that still view Trump as the centerpiece of conservative politics, and it reinforces the notion that even former allies can become critics when ideological or personal rifts emerge.
Commentators note that Owens’ criticisms reflect deeper fractures within the right: tensions over Israel, foreign policy, and the role of identity in conservative discourse. For Trump, the damage is two-fold. Not only is a prominent former supporter turning publicly critical, but she is doing so under the banner of loyalty to a conservative figure (Kirk) often associated with his camp.
Controversial stance
Owens once declared Trump the “savior” of Western civilization.
Today, she labels him a “loser” for staying silent when she believes action was needed most. Their relationship — once emblematic of modern conservative unity — now mirrors the unsettled and often fractious nature of 2020s-era politics.
With no concrete evidence emerging to support her assertions regarding Kirk’s death, Owens’ stances remain controversial. Yet her departure from Trump’s orbit shows that in politics, alliances are fragile.
