TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Speaker 1 questions the letter's truth; Speaker 2 confirms, "Yeah. I mean, it's it's real." They reference Nick Fuentes claiming Israel killed Charlie and mention "the call, like, Israel called him and told him to to to." Speaker 2 summarizes Charlie's Israel stance as nuanced: "he wanted people who controlled The Holy Land to be civilized people" and "didn't want it to be in the hands of Islam," preferring "a civilized group ... friendly to the West" over hostile Muslim nations. He was frustrated at being unable to criticize Israel without being labeled an anti Semitic, and had vehement disagreements about how the war was prosecuted and messaged; he wanted it to be over and saw more freedom to criticize America than Israel. "Even Tucker Carlson" noted Charlie Kirk's anti Semitic labeling; "BB's comments" were odd; he hosted critics like Dave Smith and recognized that "young people were much more Israeli skeptic," arguing that silencing debate would be a "huge disservice to the conservative movement."

Speaker 0 says, "And I don't know how the executives over at Turning Point USA sleep at night." He adds, "No matter what the cost is, you tell the truth. That's it." He alleges that "about forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died, Charlie informed people at Turning Point, as well as Jewish donors and a rabbi, that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright" and that he "refused to be bullied anymore by the Jewish donors." He challenges TPUSA to answer: "Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself?" He asks for "'the name of the Jewish donor who sponsored the Hamptons weekend'" and whether there were LLCs paying Rob McCoy. He asserts, "Charlie did not die pro Israel. He did not die for Israel," noting that "Friends of Israel were pressuring him really badly." He vows to expose lies and ends, "Somewhere, Charlie is watching."

Charlie mentioned Tucker and Candace forty eight hours earlier as they were trying to control who he's allowed to speak to. He was worried that Israel was infringing upon speech in America; "I have text messages to that effect." He was genuinely pro Israel; "there was nothing. there was not payment that was coming in." Toward the end, he was "over it towards the end because of Jewish behavior". Less than forty eight hours before he died, "Charlie announces that he has no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause because of Jewish donors and their behavior living up to these stereotypes." We never said "Israel killed Charlie Kirk." "I am uncomfortable with how many lies people that support Israel have been telling in the wake of his death."

I was shocked and sickened by the reaction of the ghoulish and really repulsive reaction of the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, to Charlie's death. He basically made it all about him and redirected the grief toward support for his project. "Benjamin Netanyahu is not the same as the nation of Israel at all." "BB's defenders, on the Internet will call me a liar or a kook, but that's a fact." "what he said was completely untrue." "Charlie didn't hate Jews. He loved Jews. He loved the state of Israel. He loved going there." "He did not like Bibi Netanyahu, and he said that to me many times." "He felt that Bibi Netanyahu was a very destructive force." "He was resentful that he believed Netanyahu was using The United States to prosecute his wars for the benefit of his country." "Shortly after that speech, there was a very intense attack on Charlie; he had $100,000,000 worth of donors." "Two days before he died, he lost a $2,000,000 donation because he had publicly pledged to bring me to the next Turning Point Conference in December." "They put out a flyer basically saying that I was going to be at this event giving a speech."

This transcript presents a heated claim about Candace Owens, Charlie Kirk, and Israel, centered on Turning Point USA leadership. It opens with "This just changed everything. Holy shit. Wake up America. Shit's getting crazy." Owens is said to "put the higher ups at Turning Point executives on blast" and to "challenge them to publicly release a statement about her explosive statement regarding Charlie Kirk's position on Israel." She quotes: "About forty eight hours prior to his death, Charlie Kirk notified Turning Point USA, Jewish donors, and a rabbi that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright." She asks: "Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself?" and demands: "I want you to literally answer what I have just said. It either happened or it didn't." The claim: "Forty eight hours later... a bullet to the throat" and "This changes fucking everything." The piece also attacks "trans slop trans shooter agenda" and "slop media," cites "24% of Americans" pro-Israel vs "98% of our government" pro-Israel, and ends with "Bukele Two Point O" and "a bush light wrapped in shit."

- the truly earth shattering and transformative event of Charlie Kirk's assassination - one of the main controversies today as part of the fallout of that memorial service - to express forgiveness for the person who took her husband's life - Ultimately, he was a Christian evangelist. - to talk about Charlie's life and the values that he represented - This was not some scripted speech. - The phraseology wasn't constructed in advance. - Polling data shows support for Israel unraveling - They wrote a letter to Fox News to the Murdoch family, condemning Tucker Carlson's impassioned defense of a quote, race replacement theory, and demanding that he'd be fired. - Cut Tucker loose.

Candace Owens claims Netanyahu lied about the letter Charlie Kirk wrote to him, saying Netanyahu read a letter on US national television 'about how much Charlie loved Israel,' but Owens says 'that's not what the letter said.' Owens, a close friend of Charlie Kirk, says Netanyahu needs to release that full letter: 'Let Charlie speak for himself. Don't put fake words in his mouth.' She questions why 'you're the leader of a nation who's at war with seven countries halfway across the world, and you're booking a prime time slot on US TV airwaves to come and lie about Charlie one day after this tragedy? What is going here?' Noting that Charlie was 'at war with his donors over the question of Israel and the war in Iran,' she adds this was heating up and Charlie was fearing for his life. She concludes: 'Do not listen to people who say stop asking questions because they do not have your best interests at heart, they definitely don't have Charlie's best interests at heart, and they don't want you to find out the truth.'

The video centers on Candace Owens and Turning Point USA, with the speaker claiming Owens 'puts the higher ups at Turning Point executives on blast' and challenges them to publicly release a statement about 'her explosive statement regarding Charlie Kirk's position on Israel.' It highlights this claim: 'About forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died, Charlie informed people at Turning Point, as well as Jewish donors and a rabbi, that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright.' The speaker presses, 'Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself?' and notes Nick Fuentes saying, 'there was no signs Israel had no reason to want Charlie Kirk dead.' The rant attacks media figures as 'slop media' and declares 'trans slop trans shooter agenda' as 'trash,' concluding with claims that '24% of Americans' are pro Israel while '98% of our government is pro Israel,' and referencing 'Bukele Two Point O.'

Speaker 0 outlines 'the brilliance of Candace Owens' and says she 'literally smoking them out' with a video claim: 'forty eight hours prior to Charlie's death, Charlie Kirk notified Turning Point USA Jewish donors and a rabbi that he had no choice but to completely abandon the pro Israel cause outright.' The narrative cites a '$150,000,000 offer from Benjamin Netanyahu' to Turning Point USA 'to shield for Israel harder, and in particular to support regime change in Iran and to support their ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza.' Kirk allegedly refused. They allege Bree Lynn Hollyhan appeared on Fox News and that Turning Point is 'rebranding as our new Charlie Kirk' with 'ultra mega.' They declare 'Charlie did not die pro Israel.' The piece ends with 'Checkmate motherfuckers.'

Speaker 0 expresses grief over Charlie Kirk’s death, acknowledging it’s been difficult and that Charlie may have been a political pawn. He notes Trump’s non-reaction as upsetting. John and Irina Mappin publish a public statement praising Charlie: "Charlie Kirk built Turning Point USA on transparency, free speech, and a relentless pursuit of truth." They state: "If Candace Owens had been assassinated, Charlie would have torn apart every lie" and "Charlie did not sleep for several days and several nights just to ensure that J. D. Vance became the vice presidential nominee." They condemn the investigation as troubling—"a crime scene apparently completely destroyed in days, and plenty of evidence that simply does not add up"—and urge officials to share everything with Candace’s team. "Justice needs not just to be done, it needs to be seen to be done justly," and they invoke "There is a relationship between truth and God." They praise Candace’s journalism, urge truth.

Charlie was loyal to people with whom he had shared history. He would never say an ill word about Candace and refused moral blackmail. He stayed loyal to old donors and Turning Point colleagues, avoided airing dirty laundry, and, though he disagreed with Candace and Tucker on the Israel issue, he recognized Tucker’s value and invited him to events. He could not be controlled or bought, and when faced with threats to cut large donations, he reacted with defiance: “screw me. No. Screw you.” He loved Israel and the Holy Land, and, amid a surge of anti-Israel sentiment on the right, he tried to chart a path forward for sympathizers. He wrote to Bibi: “You are losing the PR war. You need to change how you do your PR. You need to change your messaging to the American right,” suggesting a more passive relationship and opposing Islamic migration. He vented privately when accused of antisemitism, but publicly avoided such disclosures.

Speaker recounts meeting with Charlie: it wasn’t about 'this is what you should say,' but 'talking through the issues' as Charlie asked questions and began forming positions. He would 'approach this issue this way' and decide his stance on topics like 'USA to Israel,' which speaker opposed, wanting it drawn down; Netanyahu has said he wants it drawn down. Charlie would articulate his position more quickly than the speaker. They discussed why is Israel actually an American America's interest to support Israel and explored approaches to justify it, not just those favored by Israelis or the Israeli government, but ways to help Charlie feel comfortable with a position. Charlie is a 'listener' who believes in the 'open marketplace of ideas'—his existential core—and he platformed Tucker Carlson; silencing any opinion was 'anathema' to him because of truth seeking. 'For all of us, our best traits we often have to a fault.'

This transcript describes a discussion with Orthodox friends about Charlie inviting Tucker Carlson. It notes there is nowhere safe for them in the world, and they have an inclination to trust no one, yet Charlie remains patient, engaging in dialogue with Tucker and Candace Owens, while also texting with Orthodox rabbis. The speaker commends Charlie for his patience and dialogue. The speaker responds to an Orthodox brother who claimed Candace is far right and Ocasio-Cortez far left, and that they both hate Jews. The speaker says Candace and AOC appear to operate their influence by pathos and ethos, and apply very little logos. They use pathos and ethos to judge and condemn an entire race of people. This is not framed as a political polarization issue (far right or far left) but as mob rule by emotion and perceived legitimacy void of the pursuit of truth. The speaker asserts that this dynamic is a reason America, for now and hopefully more in the future, is a somewhat safe haven for Jews because it is a republic. A link to a video was provided to illustrate or support this point.

The speakers discuss alleged hidden dynamics within Turning Point and connections to international and ideological forces. Speaker 0 claims that Arizona has long investigated Turning Point, and that conversations within the state finally broke into the public sphere. He says he spoke with Liz Harris, a former Arizona House member, and asserts that Harris told him, “Turning Point's Mossad. Tyler Boyer is Mossad. They're all neocons. They're connected to Mossad.” He says he has the report and a recording of Harris saying this, emphasizing that many people warned him but he wanted to verify for himself. He states that "when Charlie died that was it for me" and that he decided it was time to come out and reveal what he witnessed and participated in, apologizing to the American people. Speaker 1 acknowledges familiarity with Liz Harris and then asks for details about internal communications leaking after Charlie’s death, which allegedly show that he was leaving the Zionist cause and that leadership faced questions about Israel policy. The question is whether Tyler Boyer was explicitly asked about this direction and what his answer was. Speaker 0 describes an incident in Boyer’s office where a female associate asked Boyer, “why are you so against Candace Owens. The Israel cause etcetera.” He says Boyer closed the door, pulled the speaker’s friend in, and told her, “listen, I’m a Zionist. Candace Owens is a black conservative who wants to be relevant in this movement. And she's doing whatever she can at all cause to stay relevant.” He presents this as proof, claiming it is in the text he sent to Stu and that the friend confirmed it in the office encounter. Across the exchange, the core assertions are that Liz Harris labeled Turning Point's leadership as connected to Mossad and neocon interests, specifically naming Tyler Boyer as Mossad; that after Charlie’s death there were internal, leaked communications about Zionist alignment and Israel policy; and that Boyer disclosed a Zionist stance and disparaged Candace Owens during a confrontation in his office, presenting Candace Owens as attempting to stay relevant in the movement.

Speaker alleges that “within forty eight hours before Charlie passed away, his top Jewish donors were pulling funding from him, demanding that Charlie take their name off of the building that they had donated to Turning Point. And then once Charlie was killed, they said, never mind, put it back on the building.” He says Charlie had “alluded to a tremendous loss of money coming in” and that “more people are going to come out with information. This is all inevitable.” The speaker notes Beebe's PR blitz: “Beebe recently was on a PR blitz despite the fact that he was fighting this ninety six thousand front war because Israel didn't do nothing,” listing podcasts and asking, “Anybody find it weird you didn't do Charlie Kirk show?” Tomey is cited: “Charlie was implied that Charlie was penning love letters to him in May. I just love you so much.” He calls a “hostile takeover” and says after Charlie's death, supporters claim “the energy is Charlie died for Israel,” which is “literally untrue, and we're not going to allow it.” Okay? It's just not true.

Charlie Kirk's perspective on Israel was not starting to shift. It had shifted entirely. Israel knew that. Turning Point USA knew that because Charlie was explicit. He wrote of his deep love for Israel. About forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died, Charlie informed people at Turning Point, as well as Jewish donors and a rabbi that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright. Charlie was done. He said it explicitly that he refused to be bullied anymore by the Jewish donors. Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself? And then did he, just forty eight hours later, conveniently catch a bullet to the throat before our on stage reunion could happen?

On a Zoom call the night before his death, I was giving Charlie advice for how to message on this issue on his forthcoming campus tour, and he joked, “Josh, I'm gonna mention your book, Israel and civilization, and it's so good.” He referenced a letter to Netanyahu read in June or July; the opening sentence is, “As a Christian, one of my greatest joys in life is making friendships with the Jewish people and defending the state of Israel.” After his death, critics claimed he was turning on Israel, but that letter begins this way: “As a Christian… defending the state of Israel.” “Filth. Okay? Absolute filth. I I don't understand it.” “There was no truth in him.” He says three people claimed Charlie said within twenty four hours he thought they would kill him, and questions Josh Hammer about “the night before.” He warns: “if I get a text message… I will release it instantly. There'll be no place that you can hide.” He sent around a life insurance policy package with “text messages, emails, private communications, videos, and private legal documents.” He says, “If anything happens to me, … they have my explicit permission to release it all, detonate it all, expose all of these people in politics and in the movement who behave like this behind the scenes. It's necessary.” He cites Kanye: “Everything that Kanye said was so real. … Kanye was right” and urges to “leave me alone. Let me say what I believe, you say what you believe. Fight fair.”

From the outset, one of the speakers says there was a sense that the official narrative about the day didn’t add up, expressing that many Americans feel they were being lied to. The major problem they identify with the assassination narrative includes inconsistencies and unanswered questions rather than acceptance of the official story. Speaker 1 recalls being told Charlie Kirk was shot and initially in critical condition, but notes that the video shows an exit wound and movement of Kirk’s shirt that suggests an impact nearby. With extensive experience around gunshot wounds, they say what they saw didn’t make sense. They reference the FBI’s announcement of a shooter and describe a separate incident involving a person on the roof who allegedly disassembled and reassembled a firearm, aligned a scope, fired a cold bore shot, moved to the roof, and then wrapped the rifle up. They mention texts from the shooter that didn’t sound like a typical 22-year-old and state that these observations raise questions. They say asking questions leads to being torn down or accused of holding conspiracy views, and they specify they aren’t claiming “Israel did it,” but insisting the questions about the event “don’t look good.” They raise specific questions: did the security team remove Charlie Kirk’s lapel mic after the incident and give it to someone else; what happened to the SIM card; did someone take the camera behind him; why was the crime scene contaminated and rebuilt. They admit they don’t know what is true but insist the questions deserve answers. They note that once they question, they’re labeled antisemitic, and they say they didn’t even bring up Israel. They emphasize the personal and national significance of the incident. Speaker 0 mentions a claim that Charlie Kirk was portrayed as Superman, with his body supposedly stopping the 30-odd-six bullet, and asks what would have happened if a 30-06 round hit him. Speaker 1 says it would likely blow his head off and leave remnants of the bullet, arguing that they don’t think such remnants have been found yet. They question why the chair and desk were moved and contend that a forensic expert could determine the shot’s origin, insisting they are simply asking questions. If those questions can be refuted, they would stop asking; but they claim they’re not getting any answers beyond “this is what happened” and being told to “shut up.” Speaker 0 adds that telling someone to be quiet amounts to labeling them antisemitic, and that when the trial comes, they will look like a fool. Speaker 1 says that’s a tactic of the left—when you call them out, they label you a name—and that the right is now doing the same to them.

Candace Owens publicly pressures Turning Point USA executives to address her explosive claim about Charlie Kirk's stance on Israel and his death. She states: "Forty eight hours prior to his death, Charlie Kirk notified Turning Point USA, Jewish donors, and a rabbi that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright." She asks, "Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself? And then did he, just forty eight hours later, conveniently catch a bullet to the throat before our onstage reunion could happen?" and demands: "I want Turning Point USA executives to issue a very clean statement saying that I am lying if this is not true." A speaker adds: "You tell the truth and you tell it immediately." The clip asserts "There was no signs Israel had no reason to want Charlie Kirk dead" and questions whether "the most pro Israel ally ever" would turn on them. It closes with broader anti-media and anti-government rhetoric, citing "24% Americans pro Israel" and "98% of our government pro Israel."

Speaker accuses Turning Point USA of hiding the truth about Charlie Kirk's death and asserts: "Forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died, Charlie informed people at Turning Point USA that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright. Charlie was done. He said it explicitly that he refused to be bullied anymore by the Jewish donors." The speaker challenges TPUSA executives to issue a "very clean statement" saying "I am lying if this is not true." They ask, "Did he express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back...?" They contend, "Charlie did not die pro Israel. He did not die for Israel. He did not martyr himself as a friend of Israel." They claim "the friends of Israel were pressuring him badly" and declare, "the truth is going to win."

I’m going to state this, and I’m going to challenge Turning Point USA executives to issue a very clean statement saying that I am lying if this is not true. About forty eight hours before Charlie Kirk died, Charlie informed people at Turning Point, as well as Jewish donors and a rabbi, that he had no choice but to abandon the pro Israel cause outright. Charlie was done. He said it explicitly that he refused to be bullied anymore by the Jewish donors. Did he express that? Did he also express that he wanted to bring me, Candace Owens, back because he was standing up for himself? Just forty eight hours later, a bullet to the throat. Charlie did not die pro Israel. He did not die for Israel. He did not martyr himself as a friend of Israel. The truth is going to win.

"This is an actual group chat, which happened two days before Charlie Kirk was assassinated." "There were nine people in total on this chat, including Charlie and Rob McCoy." "Rob McCoy was on this text thread." "just lost another huge Jewish donor. 2,000,000 a year because we won't cancel Tucker. I'm thinking of inviting Candace." "Charlie writes, Jewish donors play into all the stereotypes. I cannot and will not be bullied like this. Leaving me no choice but to leave the pro Israel cause." "please do not invite Candace. That might feel good short term but it's not good long term."

Addressing chatter about a text chain released by Candace Owens, the screen grab is authentic. He didn’t share publicly because it was private and he didn’t want to betray a friend's trust, but he shared it with some in government since it happened quickly. It took thirty three hours for authorities to get their suspect, and in the first moments they wanted no stone unturned. He says, 'we want justice for Charlie more than anybody else, and no stone unturned.' He notes, 'it was not mine to share publicly.' 'It's been so frustrating to have people blow up about this,' and explains, 'I am an eyewitness to events, and they said, don't comment on things because anything you say can mess that up. I don't want to mess up any trial for the person who did this.'

During the segment, the speakers address a private text exchange released by Kent Owens. They confirm the screen grab is authentic but say it was private; it was shared with a few government officials because rapid events followed the incident. They note that authorities identified a suspect within 33 hours and emphasize “no stone unturned” in pursuit of justice for Charlie. One speaker, an eyewitness, says they avoid public comments to not affect a trial. They affirm free speech as a guiding principle and defend Charlie's public stance on Israel as nuanced but consistent. Charlie wrestled with Israel for months; he read about the conflict and warned against anti-Israel sentiment online. He believed Hamas started the war and could end it; Israel represented European civilization, Hamas Middle Eastern barbarism. He loved and cared about Israel.