She was visibly upset this morning and she said she can't trust Trump anymore. What? She said she was watching a Candace Owens video and she says he hasn't done enough to get to the bottom of Charlie Kirk's death. That he didn't push Kash Patel for a deeper investigation. That Trump had some role in it, blah, blah, blah.
I don't watch any of that stuff. I don't watch the news, I don't read newspapers, and I don't watch Candace Owens. I've got nothing against her but she's just too white appropriation for me. Anyway, I told her to calm down the whole thing smells like a replay of Sandy Hook, the Las Vegas Shooting, the Butler assassination attempt. Bad guy, caught, done. Too done, too fast. But not trusting Trump? Honey you need less screen time.
I disagree wholeheartedly.
I think YOU don't know the half of it.
Candace was a die-hard Trumper. A few things have happened that she's 'noticed', leaving her miffed and disappointed in him. Many of us have seen and noticed the same things. But she's extremely smart and does deep investigation to confirm or refute her worries, whether it be about Trump, Charlie Kirk, or any other subject.
If you have the time, you might go back and watch her podcasts since Charlie was killed and see how she's brought forth evidence, video, testimony and other observations re the Kirk murder. She asked for people to reach out to her and share what they know.
She states that Tyler's family contacted her personally and said that Tyler never confessed nor has ever even been to that University in his life. They say he didn't write those text messages either.
What to think, then? She has solicited videos from the TPUSA crew, videos from attendees and many other bits of evidence. She's scrutinized all of it and brought it forth for all of us to see.
I've watched most of her videos along with a bunch of other podcasters and commenters who are smart, thinking people, or are recreational hunters, EMTs, ammunition experts, nurses, etc., who are all weighing in with their observations and concerns. Nearly all, and I mean ALL, say the official story stinks like 3-day-old fish.
She worked with Charlie as recently at 2024, when she toured with TPUSA. She worked FOR and WITH HIM for SIX YEARS before he was married. She traveled with him, flew on the planes with him, stayed in hotels along with him, (her own room, of course) , worked alongside him, went hiking with him, traded texts and jokes and dreams with him. SHE KNOWS HIM EXTREMELY WELL. She also knows how TPUSA operates and has insider knowledge that we don't.
She's noticed anomalies with the TPUSA crew, how they behaved when he was shot, what they've said about Charlie afterwards, and other things that don't ring true.
She says they lied immediately afterwards, making claims and statements she knows to be untrue. When she publicly refuted them, they called her 'crazy' saying Charlie had 'broken up with her years ago', and that, 'He hadn't spoken to her in years' when in fact, she'd resumed touring with him as recently as 2024!
Charlie was a HUGE fan of Trump and Candace wonders why Trump has not been more interested in the conflicting stories coming out and the possibility that a patsy is being framed and that our 'Best Ally' may have something to do with it.
She feels he should have taken a more PERSONAL INTEREST in getting to the truth for their mutual friend CHARLIE.
And I agree with her 100%.
I think your assessment is very much on the target.
btw, I found that D'Souza's observations here resonate quite strongly with my perceptions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQS4FKH3hDA
Dinesh D'Souza Calls Out Tucker and Candace Owens
Thanks for providing that clip. I don’t want to listen to anything Candace says and am getting less interested in Tucker, too. I hate being manipulated. I pray for discernment to know who is lying to me and that has given me a “gut feeling” about certain people. I trust that 🙏.
I heard someone on a podcast the other day say something that I think is really important, the gist of which was this:
Before, the mainstream media were the gatekeepers. They controlled and filtered what information we could access. But with the expansion of social media, the media sphere has become a wild west; you cannot reply on anyone out there to be gatekeepers. One has to become one's own gatekeeper. (To be responsible) each person has to learn to be their own gatekeeper. re; what information I take in, and what information I reject.
Me too. It's the one thing I detest the most, and I care not if its coming from overt communist propaganda or alt-media inflooencers or 'truth tellers'. Don't try to manipulate me. Be open, objective and reinforce that by transparency in how you operate.
One thing I find interesting is how heavily people downvote when someone they 'like' or 'support' or 'trust in' is criticized or contradicted. Sometimes its useful, but it would be better for all of people stuck to the argument being offered, rather than just down-voting because you expressed an opinion that 'Candace isn't great'.
Really? Was that before or after the 2018 midterms, when she went anti-Trumping because of 'his role' in the result? Was that before or after she trashed Trump and fell for the De Santis psyop sting?
Does she think that he should put his international and national focus on hold, because he's really not got anything more important to focus on, so he should drop everything and make Candace's perspective the important focus?
I mean, like her criticism and ranting against Trump because she went after Macron's <spouse> DJT would not come in and phone Candace and 'stand up for her rights'?
At the very best, she is guilty of extreme myopia. At the worst, narcissistic expansionism. Which one? I don't really know.