Candace Owens Meets Erika Kirk for Four Hours: Egyptian Planes, Turning Point Lies, and Charlie Kirk Assassination Investigation

Let's assume for a moment you're right and that all these Egyptian planes were flying around tracking Charlie Kirk and Turning Point and Erica Kirk. Why? What are they? What is your theory? >> I don't know. I don't know. >> What's your theory though? There must be You must have an idea. >> My theory is that we should investigate everything strange that happened on that day so we can figure out what happened. The difference between me and you is that I have the courage to take the risks and ask the questions first. Okay. Before it's popular. You wait until it becomes popular and then you change your mind. >> Stop. and and she made no request of you whatsoever, Erica Kirk, in four and a half hours. Well, no matter what your opinion is about Candace Owens, and very few people don't seem to have one, she has a definite knack for commanding attention. Many people have been openly enraged by her theorizing on the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Many have been captivated nightly by what they see as either a thrilling real-time investigation into a colossal coverup or a cynical strategy to exploit the most emotive and consequential news story of the year. Several of the cand's claims have focused on Turning Point USA, the organization funded by Charlie Kirk and now run by his widow Erica who last week issued this firm request. >> She has been one of the main peddlers of these conspiracies and she is making a huge amount of money on it. She is building her business off of these lies. What do you want to say to her and the other people that are putting these lies out into the world right now? Stop. That's it. That's all I have to say. Stop. >> Well, shortly after that, Candace Owens was invited to a lengthy private meeting with Erica Kirk, which is now the catalyst for frenzy speculation that she may be having second thoughts about some of her theories. She's also, I should add, marking the release of her new book, Make Him a Sandwich. And amid all of that, she joins me now for her first interview since the meeting with Erica K. Candy Stones. Welcome back to Uncensored. >> It's good to be with you at the end of another year. >> Yes. And what a year it's been. Um, not least for you. Um, it's it's fair to say your fame continues to rise, infamy, some would put it. Um, but you're always a welcome guest on Uncensored. Let's get to this extraordinary meeting that you had with Erica Kirk. Uh it came right after we saw her say uh in that CBS town hall, you should stop the conspiracy theories. So, who approached who about you guys actually getting together? >> I was approached by Turning Point after Blake Nef, who works on Charlie's show, sort of fumbled this invite. It was I'd almost say like a it was a fake invite publicly and then in the middle of the night side said, "Oh, Candace is is not able to be here tomorrow." And they never messaged me. And I think there was quite a bit of public backlash with how they went about it. It just was just not the way that we we try to set meetings. And so what happened after was they reached out to me uh said Erica would agree to do uh a live stream, just the two of us. And then after Erica's PR blitz, they reached out again and said that they felt that it was better for us to meet one-on-one uh as opposed to us sitting down having Megan Kelly moderate, which was the idea originally. >> Right. And and so where did where did you have your your summit meeting? >> At a hotel here in Nashville. And a lot of your, as you know, a lot of your supporters, fans of your show, think that you may have been lured into a trap. Did anything while you were there make you think you were being lured into a trap? >> I don't know that a lot of my fans think that I was being lured into a trap. I think ahead of time they had some concerns obviously because I think in general after you see a public assassination and you start tracking so many lies that are happening there's going to be an understandable amount of angst that people feel and I I certainly felt the angst as well. I' I've obviously been very clear that I am suspicious of some of the characters that are at Turning Point USA. So I I I totally understand why the the public was concerned >> when [snorts] you saw Erica. She was obviously angry about you in that CBS town hall. What was her demeanor like when you met her? >> Well, I don't think that she thought she was angry in that. I think maybe that was the characterization from the public. I certainly thought she was angry as well and she sort of clarified that she was a bit annoyed by the questioning, the way in which Barry had set up the question with the podcaster Candace Owens, which I think was definitely being driven more by Barry Weiss's feelings towards me, longunning feelings towards me than it was perhaps for the benefit of CBS and and trying to pretend to be an impartial journalist. So I think she was frustrated by the line of questioning is what she explained to me. >> So how would you categorize the four and a half hours if you were looking at it in totality? What was the tone of the conversation? What do you think you both got out of it? Well, for me, answers to the questions of trying to understand why there were so many turning point lies and why instead of people acknowledging that these are lies, I felt that there was this billion dollar psychological operation to convince people that Candace is just crazy. These are lies. These are made up. And so, I was very refreshed that they owned up to the lies. That was a great first step. And I I think you know what motivates that? Maybe because despite having what I would assume to be the best PR agents and crisis PR agents in the world, we're moving toward a different world where people don't really care, you know, if you are are friends with the people at is it what is it? WME and and CIA and what they can do for you. That that sort of power is ineffectual in this day and age. And so I I think they recognize that and that the public simply doesn't believe the story that they've been fed and the psychological operation to convince us not to believe our own eyes or to trust our common sense instincts has failed. And >> I think on their end they got more clarity uh on how I figured out certain things, more clarity on on why I am convinced that there are people that are inside of Turning Point that are dirty and I was able to share more with them off record and I think that they got more clarity >> exchange. Before we get into some of the sort of specifics, is there not a danger here? I've already seen it some of the reaction from people that follow you follow your show. Is there not a danger that in seeking to be the one that exposes the truth and I listen I don't know the truth about what happened to Charlie Kirk. I work on the assumption that this lone twisted weirdo Tyler Robinson killed him for whatever reason and I suspect personally that is how this will play out. However, I have an open mind in the sense that we still don't really know what happened with President Kennedy's assassination. I found the attempted assassination of Donald Trump very odd in the way that that's been handled by the authorities and so on. I'm not naive as a journalist of 40 years. I'm not naive enough to say every single thing you've been saying is obviously baloney because I don't know. Um, and we'll get to some of the more specific details, but is there not a danger, Candice, that by having a four and a half hour private meeting rather than doing it in public, that all you're really going to do collectively, actually, you and Erica Kirk, is fuel the conspiracy theories about what you may or may not have discussed in that meeting, what part of the stuff that you've been broadcasting on your show she agrees with and doesn't agree with, and so on. Is there not a danger? This is the least transparent way of going about trying to get solutions here. >> Well, I'm a very transparent person. So, my preference was to do it publicly. But I I took the offer obviously to have any conversation because if I hadn't done that, then I think everything I've been doing would have appeared disingenuous. Like, oh, Candace is pretending that she wants answers to her questions, but when she got this offer, she suddenly said she didn't want to go because it wasn't public. They would have felt like I was moving the goalpost. Uh, so I was willing to take anything. And uh from their viewpoint, they felt like after the CBS news and the Fox News hits that Erica did, it was my understanding was that they felt that it was a good idea to bring the temperature down first by having us sit down and communicate. Uh and that doesn't mean that they necessarily say, "Oh, that's it. Now we're not going to have any other public discussion." I'm hopeful they will. I think they should. I I totally agree with you. More transparency, the better. >> Who else was in the meeting? Eric Erica was there. Who else was there? >> Justin Strife, who is the COO of Turning Point USA, and my husband was only there for a portion of it, and my cousin. >> So, there were no there no lawyers, for example. >> No, no lawyers. But they did phone their lawyer because I asked the question. I was like, "Look, I'm open to being wrong. Obviously, I I if there is something, which I think the media was kind of hinting at that they had more, but they couldn't share it with the public." I said, "I'm happy to keep my mouth shut and I I want to feel good walking out of here that there is something there. There is some sort of a smoking gun and I will tell viewers just to be patient." And so they did call one of the lawyers working on this case and it was not convincing at all. He he said effectually in effect, "All we have is what the public has seen and we won't know more because we're investigating and looking for more." And so that just made me go, why is everybody being so over the top and ridiculous and using words like the evidence is overwhelming. It was Tyler Robinson when they don't have anything that's overwhelming to show that it's they've never they didn't see a they don't have a a video of him taking the shot, which I think was something that I assumed like, okay, there's all these cameras. Maybe they actually have that video and they're waiting for a moment uh to release that to the public. They don't have that. Um or at least I can say Erica's side has not seen that. And the lawyer communicated to me that they would not have access to that until earliest would be May. That right now they're just investigating just like we're doing back at home. >> You said that your motive for going to the meeting was that you would be able to come out and tell the world Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk. So are you in a position to say that? Do you believe as a consequence of your four and a half hours with Erica? Do you believe that it is now most likely that Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk? >> Absolutely not. I haven't seen one piece of compelling evidence that Tyler Robinson scaled the rooftops like Spider-Man on a college campus that he didn't go to uh and fired one shot, a magic bullet shot uh in and killed Charlie Kirk. I just I have not seen one piece of compelling evidence. In fact, I've seen more compelling evidence to the contrary. >> You've seen their vibrant ads illuminating billboards and train stations for many years. Now, it's time you actually saw the show. Shenyund is celebrating its 20th anniversary. A dazzling run, which has seen iconic performances at iconic venues like the Kennedy Center, the London Coliseum, and the Sydney Opera House. Each season tours to more than 200 cities worldwide. You'll see classical Chinese dance, a live orchestra, and stunning animated backdrops which bring to life 5,000 years of Chinese civilization. Worldclass performers in flawless costumes tell a story of myths, legends, warriors, and heavenly realms, all set to stunning music. It's been described as inspiring, uplifting, and life affirming. And if you're looking for an unforgettable gift for your family, I really recommend that you check it out. Visit shenyum.com/pers to wave all ticketing fees when you order. That's shenyum.com/pers. >> Who does does Erica think killed her husband? Well, I think that in her recent PR blitz, she sort of communicated that she trusted her team and her lawyer was using kind of the same rhetoric that the media has been using where, you know, there's really this is like, you know, it's it's overwhelming. Maybe he didn't say the word overwhelming, but he was like, "It's very clear," I think is what he said in particular. And then I pushed back and I said, "What's clear? The affidavit? That's all you guys have?" And I did tell him I if you would never be my lawyer because it's just, you know, a lawyer that's just kind of giving you adjectives and I don't need a cheerleader. I need someone to be practical and to say we don't have anything yet. I I I think the communication should be we are hopeful that throughout this investigation, we are going to uncover more evidence that links Tyler Robinson to this crime. I do feel confident that he was involved in some capacity on that day. As I have said many times on my show, I was the one who broke the story that he was at the Dairy Queen throwing out clothes, a local Dairy Queen, uh, throwing out clothes in a nearby cemetery. And so I I do think he was involved and multiple people were involved that day. And I think he did pick up clothes. I had communication with Lance's family. I had communication with Tyler Robinson's family. And for some reason, Lance is being protected, which I find to be very strange. His own family thinks he's guilty of more. And they find it weird that the feds kind of glossed over him almost as as though he was a Fed operative, like he was working on behalf of them. And you know, we've caught the the feds have lied a lot. It's just a fact. Turning Point USA people have lied a lot. That is a fact, which they have agreed to. They said that these were mistakes, but they, you know, whether a mistake or not, the public was lied to. So, I yeah, I this obviously, you know, matters deeply to me and it's just absurd that people would think that I'm doing this for clicks. I know Charlie. I knew Charlie. Uh Charlie and I were very close. And it has been one of the most disgusting things ever that people first and foremost tried to start this psychological operation that Charlie and I hadn't spoken since 2019. Uh they've lied about virtually everything that I've said on my podcast. I'm not going to let this go. Okay? I can't. We don't live in a country that is the embodiment of democratic principles. If Charlie Kirk gets publicly executed and the media apparatus is doing everything they can to cover the tracks, I would say to cover the tracks by demanding that there is no further inquiry into what happened on that day. That is not a country to get behind. >> Let's get to some of the details because it seems to me you've you've you've put up a lot of theories, but a lot of them don't seem to have a clear conclusion from you about what you actually think happened. I mean, you've been all over this now, ever since Charlie was killed. >> What What do you believe happened to him? Who do you think killed him? >> So, I can't tell you definitively who pulled the trigger. I'm not going to lie to audiences and just put something out there that's not real. Um, but what I can say is I I feel convinced that the feds were involved. I can tell you that. I I think the feds were involved in staging a cover up. I think Cash Patel knows what happened and did not happen on that day. Um, I am convinced by me being told by people that are feds that he is not acting right and that he is not wanting to share any information. Just a couple of people are allowed to even see anything. uh a Fed told me that they can't even touch the Charlie Kirk file without risk of being fired and that he he you know he's grown increasingly mad. The US marshals that were there when they were doing the quote unquote manh hunt for 33 hours said that Cash Patel effectively sent them on a wild goose chase which is what was signal to the public when he said we got him and it was actually the wrong person and so it caused people to stop looking because they were convinced they had had the shooter. um they felt that that was in order to allow the real perpetrators of the crimes to get away. I >> But that could just be that could just be the fog of the immediacy of these things. We've seen it at Brown University. Exactly the same thing. They thought they had the killer. They thought they had the killer. It turned out to be uh the wrong person. Right? It doesn't mean there's any great conspiracy by the feds to cover anything up. And again, even if what you're saying is true, I don't know. >> Maybe you're right. Uh if you're what you're saying is true, what is it they're covering up? You you've so far intimated or inferred uh something weird involving Egyptian planes. So, you know, what's that about? You've inferred perhaps Israeli involvement in some way. You've certainly inferred a lot of Turning Point USA involvement. That's a lot of people getting involved here in the murder of Charlie Kurt potentially. But what I'm what I'm really curious about is given you've been all over all this and you've been airing all these theories. Well, which one is it? It can't be all of these things. Is it somebody is it someone at Turning Point USA? I mean, who do you actually believe was >> of course it can be all of those things. And what's really um ironic here is that there's a clip of Charlie in the last months leading up to his death where he speaks about the JFK assassination and he says that multiple countries were involved. Multiple people were involved. The LBJ was involved. The feds were involved. And he's correct. That is what it means. When there is a conspiracy, there are multiple people that are involved. Of course, there's not one person on a grassy null who shot JFK. Well, it might have people who had the Dallas police. But I'm answering your question. I'm answering your question. Why aren't you just going to point to one person? That that to me, even that seems like a part of telling people not to to believe their own gut. Obviously, for this to have been pulled off, there had to have been multiple people involved. There had to have been people at Turning Point that were complicit in having this happen. Now, who knows what their motivations are. Doesn't mean maybe this person's like, "Hey, I'm going to help you." >> Hang on. Okay, let me stop you. Hang on. When you say obviously somebody at turning point, you are accusing right now people that worked with Charlie Kirk at the company he built which is now run by his widow. You are directly accusing people in that company of being complicit in his murder. Right. >> I want I want to just be very clear connecting that dot. So I said that when there is a conspiracy, of course there are going to be multiple people involved. So applying that same logic to JFK, right? knowing I like as I do and as Charlie did believe that LBJ was involved which then implicates the feds as having been involved which then implicates the Dallas police uh station as being involved. I believe Israel was obviously involved that they were the ones that wanted him dead for saying that what is now Apac should have to register under Farra. So there's motive. There are people that have to be involved on the ground that day. There are people that have to be willing to allow the perpetrators to get away. There has to be media that's complicit. And that's what literally operation mockingb bird was. It was established. >> You know the problem. You know the problem, Candace. Here's the problem. Hang on. It was established. But here's the problem with everything you're saying. >> In this massive contract, >> you keep saying, and this is where this is where people think you're prone to endless conspiracy theories for whatever reason, okay, is you keep using the phrase they have to have been involved. So by that yards, what you're saying is with JFK's assassination and we recently had a lot of the files released which did not conclusively prove any of these things. All right. Now, again, I don't know what happened to JFK, but the one possibility you've not ruled in is it was just as simple as Lee Harvey Oswald. It might have been. We don't know. Right. So, when you say when you say the media has to have been involved too many has to have been, but my problem my problem is you're stating all these things 63. It's so it's such a nonsense that to say it was Lee Harvey Oswald acting. You don't know that. That's just such a nonsense. Okay. Yeah. No, I do know it was not Lee Harvey Oswald acting by himself and then that required national security to lock down the files and that required um the feds to to impart the CIA to impart operation mockingb bird to convince the public that it oh it was you can't go against there's a grieving widow don't look further into it don't believe your own okay but let me just say this is your candid conspiracy that killed JFK and I I am going to say that confidently and I just think we we have to grow up we have to grow up we can't keep pretending Lee Harvey Oswald JFK. We can't keep >> that. That is that is your opinion. >> Today's show is sponsored by Oxford Natural, makers of the Optimum Day and Optimum Night all naturatural supplements. Thousands of Brits and Americans are already taking them with incredible results. Optimum Day boosts your energy and supports weight loss throughout the day. Optimum Night helps you relax and get deep, refreshing sleep. They have countless success stories, including from some very familiar faces. England ledger Michael Owen who lost £40, AFTV's Robbie who lost more than £100. To watch their full stories and many more, scan the QR code on your screen or visit oxfordnatural.com/pers. And here's the best part. Use the code peers and get 70% off your first order. Yes, 70% off with the code peers. >> It's an opinion. That's a fact. >> No, no, it's not a fact. >> It's a fact. >> It's not a fact. The whole reason there are still conspiracy theories about JFK's assassination is none of this is a fact. You are the feds covering it theory because the feds are never going to admit to their own crimes. That is the reason we're still may be the case, but you haven't you can't prove that. >> Yeah. Well, I I can prove common sense that Lee Harvey Oswald did not stand on your opinion and assassinate a president. And LBJ, like Charlie says in that clip, which people should go pursue, all the weird things that happened that day that were unusual and LBJ decided not to ride that day, and suddenly he reversed course on all JFK policies and he was fighting Apac. Israel killed JFK. Now, going back to your point about Turning Point USA and the ridiculous idea that implicating this is a 100 million organization, common sense. If this was not even a high-profile political assassination and this was just a guy who worked at a company that was $100 million, right? Common sense inquiry is, was there a financial motive for this person to be dead? Okay, this is like Sherlock Holmes 101. And this is what I mean when I say that the public no longer trusts the media because you're acting us to be stupid. And we don't want to do that. We actually don't want to pretend that we're clinical idiots who can't assess things and go, "Oh, there could be a massive motive here to have Charlie dead." Especially when it seems very strange that BBNet and Yahoo when nobody even had a clue of what happened. This guy's doing the rounds on Fox News and saying, "I didn't kill Charlie Kirk." Uh, that's kind of weird. Did you feel compelled to jump on to to Piers Morgan's show and say, "Just so everybody knows, I didn't kill Charlie Kirk." Why would he say that so fighting 97,000 front war? >> Candace, I want to get I want to get to the reality of what you're actually saying. So when you say that somebody at Turning Point USA, Charlie's company, was complicit in his murder, who >> who was? >> I believe that there were multiple people who at Turning Point who are, as I have said many times, my exact words are they are engaged in a cover up of what happened to Charlie on that day. >> No, but who was involved in his murder? >> I I didn't say that they murdered Charlie. >> You said that people at Turning Point were complicit in his murder. No, I my exact sentence that I said was that there were people at Turning Point who are engaged in a coverup. >> No, you didn't. Sorry, you didn't thoroughly, >> Candace. You didn't say that. You said literally >> I did say that on my entire >> You said there were people at Turning Point complicit in his murder. >> Okay, >> that's what you said >> when you and I were discussing. That's why I said let's go back. I was applying the logic of a conspiracy to JFK. I said, okay, JFK, you have people that are complicit. Of course, if you apply logic, if there is a conspiracy, there's going to be multiple people that are going to be complicit by the time in order for a large stage murder to happen. >> You specifically said you didn't say complicit in a cover up. You said complicit in the murder cuz I said who turning point was in his murder. And you said, >> "Let me clarify for you." >> Okay, you can keep saying what I said or you can listen to what I am saying. Okay. when I was using the analogy of JFK and we were connecting it. I was basically pushing back on you because you were suggesting that you know all of these people being involved would be crazy. So I was applying the analogy. Okay. >> Well, you actually if you go back and listen suggesting that a >> you don't know either. >> Your your floating theories. >> When we started talking about the perfectly entitled to your thoughts, let me very clearly started talking about the implications that you were making. It's crazy to suggest that multiple people at different levels. I was then connecting the dots and saying that in order for the JFK assassination to happen, there had to have been tons of people that were complicit, right? >> I heard what you said. >> Maybe you're the person who takes the cameras down. Maybe you're the person that told him to drive that day. Maybe you're LBJ. So, they're not all complicit in the murder, but they're all at different varying stages involved in the cover up, right? So, there that's what a grand conspiracy actually is. And I do believe so. You don't have to go back and we don't have to go through it. I'm telling you what I think about Turning Point. You know, I I am very known for being honest about what I believe. you know, I'm not exactly a person that you got to pull teeth on. I believe that there are people at Turning Point who are engaged in covering up what happened on that day. >> But were any of them engaged in the planning of the murder of Charlie Kirk? >> I I I wouldn't know how it was planned. Absolutely make that statement. I can say confidently that I know they're engaged in the coverup because I've been investigating what happened on that day and what what transpired thereafter. I've been clear. I've named those people on my show. I've said they are engaged in a cover up and and I've listed the lies. So, you don't have to try to make something out of what I didn't say. I I tell you what I think. It's already controversial. We don't need to get more controversial. Okay. Do I think someone at Turning Point pulled the trigger? No. Obviously, I don't think someone at Turning Point >> think anybody at Turning Point did anybody at Turning Point. Did anybody at Turning Point in your opinion know that Charlie Kurt was going to be murdered? There is specifically two people at Turning Point USA and I have communicated that information to Erica and Justin Strife that I would not be surprised if they had foreign knowledge of Charlie Kirk being assassinated. But you have any evidence? >> I'm not going to name I I I am not going to name those people. Okay. Because it's not right for me to name those people until I know for a fact that they >> Did you give the names to Did you give the names to Erica? >> Yes. >> Absolutely. Did I >> You gave the names to Erica of two employees, current employees at Turning Point who you believe were involved in the preparation for the murder of Charlie Kirk. Is that what you're saying? >> I told them that if if I were in your shoes, the would these would be two employees that I would look further into. >> And what evidence do you have that they had any prior knowledge of the murder? >> Because I don't have concrete evidence is the reason why I'm not naming them. So, I've been evidence but you're but you're but you're telling the widow that these two people may have been involved in the murder. But you see the problem. >> Well, it's well what the evidence for it is people that they there there is not concrete evidence. It's like you're trying to get me to say something that I never said and then asking me to defend it. Let's actually go to you're asking me privately did I communicate to them that I think you should look further. That's called an investigation. Piers. Okay. So, what you're doing strategy of like if somebody if somebody dies you're saying to police you can't ask any questions about anybody unless you have concrete evidence. We're at the stage of investigation. Yes, you can. And let me give people in the public the permission to do this. Follow your instinct. If you feel something is off, keep asking questions until you get concrete evidence. And when you have concrete evidence, you should name those people. I don't have the concrete evidence. I find their inconsistencies. I'm trying to answer. Pierce, you can't ask me questions. You can't ask questions. Let me finish it. I have communicated to them that their inconsistencies make me uncomfortable. I have communicated to them that somebody else who is a third party uh gave me some information that I am not yet comfortable as I am betting it giving it to the public because that's the responsibility to do these are private citizens and that if I were in their shoes and had more access to information I would go down that route okay unless I am fully confident that they actually did have something to do uh like here is the smoking gun I'm not going to name those people but the people I have named thus far are people that I believe are engaged in a cover up like I said hold me Well, let's talk about one of those people. Let's talk about one of those people because the the Turning Point producer Blake Nef wrote this in early December. Ever since Charlie's murder, Candace Owens has leveled a flood of allegations against people at Turning Point USA, people at Turning Point Action, and people who work for the show. She has made them against some of Charlie's closest friends, and against some of his most dedicated employees. She suggested that Michael McCoy, Charlie's chief of staff, knew Charlie would be murdered, was happy that he died, and stayed silent because he was told he would be the next Charlie. Now, uh let's uh move then to you said in your podcast that new information was given to you in your meeting with Erica Kirk about Mikey McCoy that's now satisfied you uh on a video on the 27th of October. You devoted a whole episode to this guy and he's supposedly strange. >> I have information that satisfied me about Mikey McCoy. Okay. [laughter] Okay. Well, you can clarify that in a moment, but let's hear what you said about Mikey McCoy before the meeting. >> So, we decided to slow this clip down and we're going to watch this clip slow down so you can see that it is exactly um 834 milliseconds from the time that you hear the shot. That is how long it takes for Mikey McCoy to put the phone to his ear. Now, why is that pre precise timing so important? Because there's no dialing. Mikey didn't have time to dial. Okay. You can't dial and uh put your phone to an ear in 834 seconds. [snorts] >> Now, what was the new information that you got in your meeting with Erica about Mikey McCoy? >> Sorry, I'm sorry. gotcha is not going too well. But I never then said I am now satisfied that Mikey put the phone to his ear. What I present to the public? >> No, I didn't say that. Sorry, just to clarify. No, no. >> Yeah. Well, you you did say you inferred on your podcast. Well, let me let me give you the chance to clarify. >> It's a very familiar story when it comes to debt. The banks win, you pay, fees, and phone calls pile up every month unless you fight back. PDS Debt has helped hundreds of thousands of people cut debt and put money back in their pockets. If you're struggling with credit cards, personal loans, and medical bills, PDS offers custom options to help you get out of debt fast. They'll go beyond the numbers to understand your unique situation and craft a personalized plan. There's no minimum credit score and they have an A+ rating with a Better Business Bureau. Don't wait another month. Take back control in 30 seconds. Get your free personalized assessment and the best option for you at pds.com/pers. That's pdsdebt.com/ peers. PDSD.com/ peers. You inferred on your podcast after the meeting with Erica that you'd received new information about Mikey McCoy which had changed your mind. Would that be the best way to categorize it or changed some of your mind? >> I didn't do that. I just presented it. Well, the only thing that I clarified on my podcast, if that's what they're getting wrong, is that some people thought that he was using a nickname that was his middle name and actually his real name is Michael, like first name Michael, because I was like trying to find something and I was like, "Oh, maybe he's actually using his middle name." So, that's what I clarified my podcast. >> And you were given call logs. Is that right? >> I presented, >> you were shown call logs. You were shown call logs. >> They gave me a print out of Mikey's call logs and I gave it to the public. That's it. I mean that they're saying this and then the public obviously comes back. >> So, do you believe Mikey McCoy had any prior knowledge of Charlie's murder? >> I can't say that he had prior knowledge of of the murder unless I have something concrete. I can't say anything about prior knowledge. What I can say is what happened on that day. Mikey's behavior is weird on that day. I find it weird like I said in the podcast yesterday that what has been communicated to the public is like he called Erica instantly. Instantly, first thing he did was call in Erica instantly. And that's actually the call logs show that he didn't call Erica instantly. What are you suggesting about this guy? As you know, when you got a massive platform showing his call, showed that Blake Nef actually about what happened on that day. >> But here's the problem, Candace. You have a massive platform. As you know, millions and millions of people hang on your every word. When you devote a large part of an entire episode to the strange behavior of Charlie Kirk's chief of staff, you are putting a target on the guy's back. You're inferring it has something to do with this or something to do with some cover up or whatever it is you're inferring. You know what you're doing when you do that. When you saw Erica Kirk, did you say to her that you believe there's something suspicious about Michael McCoy? Was she able to explain to you why there isn't? Or does she share your view that he is somehow complicit in this in some way? >> Well, we actually dedicated more time to speaking about his father, who I think is it's strange to me that that man called himself a pastor. Um, I communicated fully that like that everything about that man makes my skin crawl. I think he's a bad person. I think he's involved with bad people. And um, this is obviously like Mikey's a son. And you know, I I I asked a bit about Rob McCoy and Mikey McCoy's relationship. I would just like to be clear. I have never I I am not going to be emotionally conditioned to believe that asking questions when we aren't getting any answers is the crime itself. The crime was when Charlie got shot in the neck. Uh but you've already said you've already said though you told the easiest way to remove the easiest way. Let me finish. You can't ask me questions. Let me finish. You're contradicting what you've just said. But you have to >> You said to me earlier you what did I contradict? You said you gave two names of people in the Turning Point organization that you believe are complicit in some way. You gave those names, but you wouldn't name them because it wouldn't be right to do that. But you did name this guy Mikey McCoy who was the chief of staff >> because his actions are strange. You're you're two different things. I really, Pierce, I think you're having trouble holding on to two buckets of thought here. Okay. You said in regards to someone that was complicit in murder, that is a very serious allegation. I gave them names of people that would not surprise me if they did have fornowledge of Charlie Kirk's murder. You are now shifting gears and you're asking me about Mikey McCoy and why I am raising red flags about his behavior on my day. Because I believe his behavior on my day was weird. That's I think it's painfully obvious. I don't know people that don't duck when a shot comes out. So, I'm pointing I'm sorry that I'm I have eyes and I am agreeing with the public that Mikey McCoy's behavior was weird on that day. Okay, these are two different things. Now, if I'm going to make the an assertion that somebody had something to do with planning this murder, I better be damn sure. And I need if I said that on my podcast, right? That's all I'm saying. I never I had never made that claim that Mikey McCoy planned Charlie Kirk's assassination. No, I think like a lot of the claims you're making is it's a it's difficult to work out what you're actually claiming. You're throwing a lot of mud in the air, including people's names, which immediately then has millions of people chasing after these guys on social media and think >> I'm sorry they get caught lying. Like, I'm sorry. What is this? This is like the people the public is actually being abused. Okay, let's stop pretending that the victim >> Are they or do you just want them to think they are? No, the public is being abused because you're basically saying, "Stop noticing that people at Turning Point USA are lying." How dare this and the public? No. Yes, you are. How dare >> when there's an emphatic repudiation of what you're saying? >> If Mikey lies and Rob McCoy lies and Blake Nef lies and yes, all of these people have lied on record after the assassination. And the public goes, "Hey, that's kind of a weird lie." You're like, "How dare you put a target on their back by noticing that they're lying?" I mean, what weird psychological [laughter] operation is this? >> Do you believe Do you believe Okay, but do you believe Do you believe Erica Kirk has been lying about it? >> No, I I have been explicit on my show when people were saying, "Why aren't you attacking Erica Kirk?" I said, "Because Erica Kirk has not lied. If to the extent that she lies, I will call it out." And that is why I did call out when she lied. Okay? when she said Charlie Kirk never received any text messages the night before saying that he was worried um about that that he was going to get murdered tomorrow. I instantly said, "Well, here we have it. That's a lie. He definitively did receive send out text messages to both Dan Flood and Andrew Kova." And we met in person. She clarified that. Okay. Yes, that's real. And we didn't know until you said it because he was using a different app and she was checking his iMes. So to me, if you lie, you're going to make an enemy of me. Just don't lie. How about that basic requirement to say to people, don't lie about what happened on that day. Don't lie about what you did on that day because that's the first clue to investigators that that person should be looked at further. Again, this is common sense. >> Okay, let's move to something else Blake Nef said. He said, "Candice has made other stranger allegations involving French paratroopers in maroon shirts, Egyptian Air Force planes flying out of Provo, Utah, and potential underground assassins traveling through unseen tunnels." At one point in early November, she started wildly throwing suspicion on members of Utah Valley soccer team for wearing hoodies. I could go on. There's always something new coming up. None of it ever pans out because from the start there's been nothing there. What do you say to that? >> He's lying. And that's the reason why Blake Nef is a suspicious character. I mean, him saying that I I pointed to a soccer UVU person is complete fiction. I never disc had discussed that person on my show. Somebody was asking for a clearer photo of of the person on on X and I shared it. No suspicion. Never said this person had anything to do with anything. I never covered him as a suspect on my show of anything at all. Didn't ask for for more information on this person. That kid instantly responded and said, "Oh, those are our school colors." And that was it. And Turning Point tried to turn it into a thing. Why are you doing that? Regarding the Egyptian planes, that's a fact. Why are you saying she said that there was a military Egyptian plane on the ground that day? There was. Then in fact there were there were two. So why are you pretending that that's like a weird thing to notice and that is why people haven't talked about these planes to his other allowed to answer a single question that you say in entirety before you move on to the next question. >> You can't just keep talking at the infinitum. I'm allowed to ask you another question. >> It's called answering. You you just read an entire statement of the second point and you're like let me ask you a question. >> No I want TO ASK YOU ALREADY ASKED me a question the question that you asked. No, I want to ask you a followup specifically about the Egyptian planes given you've now addressed it, which is where is the evidence that any of these Egyptian planes were tracking Erica Kirk. >> I am going to be publishing the full document because there's not even just two planes. There's actually four planes that have been flying in and I should be more thorough because I realize that the spreadsheet >> not let's let me can I just please without you cutting me off like answer one thing. Okay. Thank you. These Egyptian planes, more broadly speaking, now that we have gone deeper onto the planes, recognizing that the reaction to them is not normal, what we can say is that these Egyptian planes are tied to Israel. They've been flying in that of Israel with their transponder off for years. But regarding the Turning Point USA picture, more broadly speaking, Turning Point USA faith, okay, obviously Erica has been involved in a lot of the church stuff. It's not specifically tracking just Erica. It's turning point faith events broadly speaking. I gave that information as well. I told Justin Strife and Erica, I'm happy to give you this like color-coded spreadsheet. There's no question there's a correlation here uh between Turning Point USA faith in particular, which by the way, from the beginning of this, I've said something is wrong with this faith contingent, especially because Rob McCoy for a while uh was heading up that department and he makes my skin crawl. Um and so yeah, I have the evidence for that and we're going to actually publish it on our website, no question, which I should have done from the very beginning. >> Let me ask you, >> showing that these planes were tracking Charlie at various times. there where Erica is, various times are where Rob McCoy is. But the consistent thread here is faith. Faith events like Kingdom to the Capital Tour. >> Assuming you're right, and I don't know, >> but I know Erica Kurt when asked about this said on CBS, "If you want to go through my flight log, go right ahead. It's very boring." >> You Candace say, "I was here on this date. I have a photo on my phone to prove I was actually in hospital having contractions." So that's one thing. She's directly repudiated. But let's assume for a moment you're right. and that all these Egyptian planes were flying around tracking Charlie Kirk and Turning Point, Faith and and Erica Kirk. Why? What do they What is your theory? >> I don't know. I don't know. >> What's your theory? There must be You must have an idea. >> My theory is that we should investigate everything strange that happened on that day so we can figure out what happened. Investigation. Why is everybody so Why are we pretending that we don't know why we ask questions? Like why? Like you're a journalist. You know what this is? You're you're like what's GOING ON? WHAT'S GOING ON? WHY DO YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY THESE PLANES were tracking Charlie? Well, my theory is that we are being sold absolute fed slop. The media is doing their operation mockingb bird part two scenario by telling us, well, unless you absolutely have a conclusion, you can't even ask the question. Yes, we very well, damn, keep asking consistent questions until we get a clarified explanation for what happened on that day. And right now, we have nothing. Okay? And that is the reason why people are watching my show because I'm the only one not treating them like they're absolute idiots who don't have two eyes who believe in magic bully theory and who understand that Egyptian planes should not have been tracking Charlie even three times this year would be an anomaly. Okay. They've been tracking him. We don't know where it's going to end. But we are going to keep asking questions until we get clear answers. >> Candace, it may be that the person in the media spewing to the public is you. >> No. Nice try. It's not. It's you by saying, "Why are YOU ASKING QUESTIONS? DON'T YOU WORRY ABOUT Mikey's feelings?" Everyone knows what this is. And like I said, because we have the example, the concrete example of after JFK's assassination, the media members quite literally being put on the payroll of the CIA. We have a historical example that we can look at and go, "We're not doing that again." Doesn't matter how many times you keep telling the public that I'm spewing It is only because there has not been anything that has come out of this investigation that makes any sense that the public is not listening to I am sorry to say this peers people like you. And what I love about you and I sitting down is at this exact same time last year you were doing the same weird questioning and making all these things when I said that they were committing a holocaust against the Gazins and then you changed your mind. I'll see you next year when you change your mind again and we have more information about what happens and you realize that the difference between me and you is that I have the courage to take the risks and ask the questions first. Okay. Before it's popular, you wait until it becomes popular and then you change your mind. >> You may remember that one of your courageous moves was to repeatedly tell the world that Bridget Macron is a man. As you now know, As you now know, we had a $300,000 bet to charity about this because she's a woman. It's my view. She's not a woman. >> Well, we're going to find out is the point because it's going to court. They're suing you. And when she proves, as she will, that she's a woman cuz it's very easy to prove and you lose that case. Then that she refuses for years. >> But then it will become more obvious to people that look, I think you're a brilliant operator at what you do. That's, you know, I like you personally. You know that, right? None of this is personal for me about you at all. I just have watched in the last year from Bridget MRO and now into the Charlie Kirk story. I think you've developed a modus operandi which at to put it politely is you flying what we would call in the world of journalism kites and just seeing what can cause the most merry hell therefore get you the biggest audience therefore make you the most amount of money and people have as you know you've been widely attacked now by a lot of people who say that you're just a ghoul a vulture you're doing this deliberately you're inventing things or just flying lousy to make money now I think you are the wrong person to give an assessment given like you know history celebrity >> can you not inter I do I do think the it's pretty rich it's pretty rich coming from you is all I'm going to say that's me putting it very nicely given your background your career your celebrity involvement the d you know princess Diana wrong messenger is what I'll say right off the top okay wrong messenger what you are mistaking uh or I guess we're not even mistaking because you know what this is you're talking about power versus the people and you are always on the side of power first. You're on the side of the Israelis. It's so horrible. Oh, I'm going to pretend I don't see tens of thousands of Gazins dying. I've actually been very critical of the Israelis as you know your bread is buttered. Everybody has a penis. Okay. It's very easy to present photos of 30 years of your life. Breit keeps teasing. Oh, I'm going to I'm wear I'm going to Breit for a blood test. We asked you for some photos and you refused and everybody knows that we're gonna find out was not shot by Tyler Robinson on a rooftop. I am sorry that in this day and age there seems to be such a shortage of testosterone that a woman has to be the person that states the obvious. Right. I invite you to join me and I know that you will by the end of next year because they're not going to get away with what they did to my friend Charlie Kirk. And I am not going to change my mind least of all when I am being called to names by someone who has quite a year a background and experience in doing things uh because it's lucrative and not always because it's sensitive. >> Sure. Listen, you can you can call me a hypocrite as much as you want. I don't care. It's fine. I'm just simply saying what other people have been saying about you. I didn't say I felt that. >> Thank you. I'll let you know what people are saying about you, too. I'll keep you like you. I read it all the time. But I would say that like I said at the start of this interview, I don't know whether any of the things you're saying are true or not. I just do know you're saying an a huge amount of stuff. It's making you very wealthy. You're getting millions and millions of people coming in. Which by which by the way, >> what is this idea that it's making me very wealthy? Can you actually explain that slowly? >> Yes, I'm going to explain it to you slowly because I had a huge run in for example like a talking point. >> Let me No, no, I'm going to explain exactly what I mean. When Sandy Hook happened and Alex Jones began weaponizing the Sandy Hook tragedy and weaponizing the grief of the poor parents who'd lost their children and I began to attack him in public and then eventually there was a court case and it turned out he'd been spewing deliberate lies and that every time he spewed them they found he made hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars in the immediate aftermath of spewing the repeated lies that it was all staged and the families actors and so on which he knew to be lies and he made himself extremely rich and ended up with a billion dollar defamation finding against him because he'd been deliberately weaponizing people's grief and the charge >> I'm asking you to explain that I'm explaining I'm explaining to you how was he making I'm explaining I'm explaining to you the the the analogy which is there are as you know right now a lot of people from Tim to New York Post to others who've come out very stridently in the last week alone in the last week and say that's exactly what you've been doing with Erica >> Kerr Yeah, but you haven't answered the question. So, this is just made up. It's, as I said, this is just all fluff. You're you're suggesting that I'm making money. Did I sign a new advertiser? Are we meeting more? Are we reading more ads? Do we put this somewhere else? Did we sign a book deal? Did I sell a t-shirt? Okay, but like, come on, Pierce. Money on YouTube. Are are you kidding me? I was already in a top 10 podcast globally before Charlie Cooper was assassinated. And if you think that I would want my friend to be assassinated so I could go from being in the top five to being number one, you're out of your mind. Okay. So disrespectful. But like the point is that nobody everyone who is saying that I'm making more money cannot say how I'm making more money cuz it's just not true. Okay. So you're like, "Oh, she got a bump in viewership talking about YouTube." >> Everyone in the world because it was a public assassination and then in the weeks following and it went back to normal. >> Candace, are your YouTube numbers up since you've been doing the Charlie Kirk investigations? >> What I am saying to you is that this is the exact same argument you guys had about Breijit. So it can't and then the same exact thought you were lying about Bridg about the Blake Lively thing. Okay, but like what about the Blake Lively thing? So you can't keep saying that, oh she's always in the top 10 because she's talking about something or I'm just This is my podcast and it's me. It's just me. People enjoy my podcast because I don't treat them like they're idiots. I don't treat them like they should accept that Breit Chrome just can't pres present one photo of herself raising her kids across 30 years. It's just too much to ask. Oh my gosh, it's ridiculous. How dare you? intrusion of privacy. She'd rather file a transatlantic lawsuit than to just produce photos and put all of this to bed. That's the difference between you and I. So now there's this lie, this repeat lie from Camala Chronicles, which we did looking into Camala's background because it was relevant to the election cycle. Then we did the Blake uh Blake Lively lawsuit and they said, "Oh, she's trying to change her brand. That's the only reason her numbers are up." Then we went to Breijit, which I lost, by the way. Uh I had had to get a whole career change when I first covered that story. So jokes's on me if I'm doing this to make money, but I was willing to be fired to tell the truth. And then it's all about Breijie. And now we've arrived at Charlie Kirk. I feel like there's something about that that actually is just people not being willing to admit that what people appreciate about me and why they keep coming back is that I'm willing to take risks to tell the truth. >> No, I think Don't get me wrong, I think it's I was already sold out to the end of the year because our podcast was was successful. I have not sold a t-shirt, nothing with his name on it. It's just me, >> Candace. The reason I told the Alex Jones story is he did he did incredibly well out of Sandy Hook with his investigations, but as was established in the court case against him brought by the families eventually and I think we're going to see the same thing with Bridget Macron and you is that he was weaponizing deliberate lies for money and I think you >> Mcronone has a penis. I I really want >> Macron does not have a penis. >> Breit Mcronone has a penis. I'm sorry. Did she get it removed? >> She had three children. Yeah, you you you you can have adoptive children. You can call somebody, but Breit Mcronone was was born a dude named Jean Michelle Tro. No. And I just feel I want you to know that. I want you to know that Breit Mcronone >> probably stands peeing up. >> Probably pee standing up. The beauty is the beauty is we have a big bet. >> We have a big bet and we're going to find out because he's going to court >> and you know you you will lose that court case. I think you know you will. >> Yeah. I am not going to lose a court case because Breijgit is presenting evidence that Breijit was born a woman because that's never even been offered. That's just their PR coming after and saying these things. Nobody believes that Breijit Mcronone is just unable to present any pictures. Nobody's asking for blood. Let's wait for the court case. Let's wait for the court case. >> Okay, great. And you will be proven wrong again. Unless it's just federal corruption. >> Okay. In the fallout from your from your uh encounter with Erica Kirk, Nick Fuentes said Candace Owens is done out. >> What a let down. Oh, lol. >> Uh Tim P uh has called you evil. He says you were you're motivated by the fact you were secretly in love with Charlie Kerr. Is that true? >> This is such ridic. Like this is what I mean when I say like it's like lol fed slop. Oh, did Tim Pool Did Tim Pool say that I was secretly in love with him? This is it's it's so Come on. There's no substance to this. This is so ridiculous. It's by any means necessary. Come out and attack Candace. The New York Post did an article that I It was honestly amazing fanfiction. They even said that I used to work at Daily Wire. I throw my keys at my staff and my staff hated me. I did not drive to work a single day when I was at the Daily Wire. They had a driver take me there. So, we're just now in in this weird spot where they're just making things up every single day. They said that my husband had a Qatari passport. And I just ignore it and I keep investigating because I know what it's meant to do. It's meant to distract me. Um, I'm very aware of what these people are trying to do and it's not working. So, I I don't really feel which of your theories of your tim which of your theories when you were with Erica did she think was convincing? >> We didn't What What do you mean by that? >> Did she think that Israel was involved? Did she think that there were French paratroopers involved? Um, did she think the Egyptian planes were complicit? Did she believe that Turning Point employees were involved? Which of the many theories? >> I wasn't I guess she thinking >> we I think you're characterizing it like I sat down and tried to convince her of my theories. That's not that wasn't the nature of the meeting that we had. I shared information with her and told her, you know, what the feds were ignoring and these are the things I'm looking into. obviously explained to her about the Egyptian plains and this bizarre connection to you know turning point faith events and tours and yeah I mean it was kind of like is sharing the information with her so there was nothing that >> but but again here's my problem Candace with the whole thing is everything is like you're just asking questions you're sharing information you're doing but when I actually ask you to be specific about well who do you think did what that's where it all hits a shuddering ing halt. You don't know, do you? >> It's >> You don't actually know anyway. >> Of course. If I If I actually knew who shot Charlie Kirk, I would be instantly publicizing it. I'd say, "I figured it out. I figured it out." That's not how an investigation works. Pierce just doesn't work like that. Okay? You have to follow the clues until you arrive at a conclusion. Of course, I cannot confidently state that it was, you know, John Smith who shot Charlie Kirk from the left side. I don't know that yet. I don't know that information yet. And when I do know it, I will publicize it without question. I just am pointing out the inconsistencies, the lies. He was not shot with 30 six and he did not have a a man of steel neck and that's completely made up. >> Well, actually that's going to be my show today. I do now factually know that that man of steel thing was made up and that never came from the surgeon's mouth. So again, we have another lie. We have another lie coming out of Turning Point USA. Uh put in quotation marks that lie that it was a direct quote from the surgeon that was made up. So, yeah, I'm going to keep keep uh track of all of these lies, deliver them to the public, and allow them to surmise. I'm going to allow them to think critically while it's still legal. I know it's barely legal in the UK. Um, and it's becoming increasingly less legal here in the United States. So, I'm going to use every opportunity to ask every question. >> Okay. Pre the meeting with Erica, you repeatedly questioned why we weren't being told where Charlie Kirk is buried or even if he has been buried yet. Did you get those answers? Uh, that's you have the wrong commentator who questioned that. I think that was Milo Yiannopoulos. >> You've never questioned You never asked where Charlie's buried? >> Nope. I just communicated to the PE that he had a Catholic funeral mass, which because people were saying I was lying about him going to a Catholic church, which was another random attack that I had to endure. Uh, so I never said that people don't know where Charlie Kirk's buried. That's just the wrong commentary. Uh, wrong commentator. >> Do you know where he's been buried? I actually genuinely never got to that question with Erica, but I do know where he's I think the implication that Milo made, again, you'd have to ask him, was that he's not buried. I do know where there is a spot for him uh to be buried um or to be held in a moselum, but I never that's just Yeah, you have the wrong person on that. Erica was emphatic in the CBS thing that she wanted you to stop with the conspiracy theories or maybe you've got it all right and all of this stuff is true and it's all involving the Israelis and Egypt and Turning Point in a mass conspiracy with this young kid Tyler Robinson brought in and they're all involved in this dramatic murder of Charlie Cut. Maybe you're Let's just assume for a moment you're 100% right. But she did tell you publicly before you met to stop. What's clear is that you're not going to stop. So is she okay with you now continuing to talk about your theories or does she still want you to stop? >> Well, she didn't ask me to stop. >> Is that's the qu if that's the question that you're asking is throughout that meeting did she >> Well, she did publicly obviously. So, so your response to that is what [clears throat] >> I'm telling you that then we had a conversation and I was not asked throughout that conversation to stop and to the contrary I shared information that I had and I got information from them >> um that helps. >> So you will carry you will carry on focus you will carry on >> yes >> with the theories >> until I feel confident of who killed Charlie Kirk. I will not stop investigating this >> and Erica is okay with you doing that. I just I don't know how many other ways to answer your question other than saying she did not ask me or request for me to stop in person and we spoke about that moment. She felt that Barry Weiss was being Barry Weiss and >> and she made no request of you whatsoever, Erica Kirk in four and a half hours. >> Request in what sense >> of how she would like you to conduct yourself about the murder of her husband going forward? No, >> nothing at all. >> No, she didn't make a request for me to conduct myself in any way. >> She expressed no concern about any of the theories that you've been >> I I I think she probably knows me through the lens of her husband. So, I don't know if that would be a thing that she would have done. Um, but no, she did not she did not ask me to conduct myself in any way. That seems to just be coming from the media of how I should conduct myself. Am I right in thinking that your mind has taken you to a place where you genuinely believe that Israel, Egypt, uh, Turning Point employees, uh, and Tyler Robinson, and potentially others, but they were all involved in the murder of Charlie Kirk. >> Well, to be fair, I think we're all putting Egypt in parenthesis because we kind of don't think that we have exactly a strong Egyptian lobby here in the United States. And there is a lot of historical precedent with um Israel kind of using Egyptian planes or using the Egyptian narrative when they want to accomplish things. So I mean I just pointed out that this is an Egyptian plane. But I Israel I got tons of questions about. Yeah. I think Israel is a very good place to start when uh BB Netanyahu is just denying and just way too involved in the beginning. That was weird. Everyone felt it was weird and they were right to feel that it was weird. And when BB admits that he called him two two weeks before and invited him to Israel, like what's that about? Uh people are being also because it's the it just happens to be that from the very beginning Zionists don't want us investigating the Charlie Crook assassination. So it's uh just I would say the usual suspects. You are correct that I have and sent information and it has not been denied by the LA palace, the White House or the Pentagon that the French Foreign Legion was on the ground that day. Again, something that I flagged to Turning Point USA uh Justin Strife that for whatever reason the feds don't want this information, which is a bit strange uh or don't seem to be interested or maybe >> we add the French Foreign Legion to the list as well. >> Yeah, but the French Foreign Legion is like a bandit of you know