Inside the Owens-Wilson Debate Over Charlie Kirk's Assassination

Showing 16 The Great Debate videos from Charlie Kirk's video collection.

In mid-2026, Candace Owens and Andrew Wilson met for a televised debate over who was responsible for Charlie Kirk's assassination, moderated by Patrick Bet-David and funded by a $300,000 wager Wilson made on Joe Rogan's show. The core disagreement was stark: Wilson placed the odds that Tyler Robinson pulled the trigger at 75 to 85 percent, while Owens put hers at zero, arguing instead that Robinson had been used as a patsy. Much of the exchange turned on what should count as sufficient proof. Wilson pointed to the rifle recovered near the scene and a medical examiner's report describing bullet fragmentation consistent with a .30-06 round. Owens pressed him instead on degraded fingerprints, disputed ballistics claims, and the legal distinction between reasonable suspicion and overwhelming evidence. She also caught Wilson unable to name a single one of the seven charges filed against Robinson, then recited all seven herself, a moment that became one of the debate's most widely shared clips. Commentators who reviewed the exchange afterward split sharply too. Some credited Wilson with exposing gaps in Owens's theory. Others argued he never actually answered her underlying question of how his evidence supports his conclusion. The debate left the case's basic facts as contested as they had been before it started.