@JodyChaseTN@RealCandaceO They must think the gravy train is coming to an end, so they’re doing everything they can to squeeze out as much money as possible while they still can.
The reason we’re even having this conversation is because of Erika. She started it back in November 2025 when she told Megyn Kelly that Charlie said if something happened to him, she would take over.
Why would she fabricate something that wasn’t true? Did she think the donors who were in the room wouldn’t come forward and say that’s not what happened?
Arthur and Julie Fields from North Carolina, the donors who asked Charlie who would take over TP if something happened to him, say the video has been doctored. According to them, Charlie never said Erika would take over. They say his answer was that the Board would figure it out if something happened to him. @AndrewKolvet@BlakeSNeff@MrsErikaKirk is this true?
@ChrisLoesch@DLoesch Using Scripture out of context, twisting its meaning, and picking only certain verses to manipulate people is no different than misusing God’s name.
Also, we heard back regarding our FOIA request for the “Erika Kirk emotional asset” e-mail from the White House Correspondent’s dinner.
Please never forget that @AndrewKolvet claimed that the email was fake. He is such a malignant liar and we will hold his feet to the fire.
https://t.co/9SQwvKa4Ix
EPSTEIN FILES BREAKING: In July 2025, key Trump team members—like JD Palantir & others who had promoted disclosure of the Epstein list—met in the White House Situation Room WITHOUT Trump in order to devise a strategy to avoid having to release the Epstein files. Here's why:
.@BlakeSNeff would have you believe we “cannot possibly know for sure how @charliekirk11 would have reacted to this conflict” in Iran….
Well, I pulled the clip so you don’t have to. It aired on June 17, 2025 — almost exactly one year ago.
Stop letting @BlakeSNeff be the arbiter of what Charlie wouldn’t say when the footage isn’t even 12 months old. Do not let them erase his voice that easily.
In this segment, Charlie goes off on the failed neocon approach, calling regime change in Iran “pathologically insane”
“This has nothing to do with nuclear weapons at this point, this is, we want to go in and take out the Regime […] and that sounds good, but that’s pathologically insane. I’m sorry. It is. How do you know it’s going to be better?”
“Regime change is not like changing the head coach on the Chicago Bears. That’s not how it works.”
Charlie’s stance couldn’t be clearer: strong rhetorical threats? Yes. Kinetic warfare and another Middle East quagmire? No.
He even praised the “underrepresented” Ron Paul isolationist approach, and said it’s “not our job to police the Strait of Hormuz.”
I’m not sure why @BlakeSNeff feels the need to overcomplicate things and deny his late friend’s own words… when he could just play. the. clip.
Especially when, right after Charlie’s death, Blake sat feet away from @MrsErikaKirk as she assured the country that they had decades of footage and would happily use it to answer these exact sort of questions.
So why the word salad now instead of just playing the clips, Blake? 🤔 Seems like his stance was pretty clear to me.
Again, I’m just listening to my friends voice, and asking reasonable questions. You should have no problem with that, right?
TPUSA has a GREAT opportunity to DEBUNK everyone and prove themselves with this Aspen donor video. If the clip they shared is clean, not edited or doctored, and in context they have absolutely nothing to worry about, and they will win... It's really that simple.
You might say, "They don't owe you anything." Perhaps they don't. However they are a tax exempt organization that is supposed to work for the public good as a 501(c)(3) so they do have some accountability to taxpayers. Was Black Lives Matter (BLM) responsible for operating as a responsible 501(c)(3) to the American public? Was the pushback on the unethical and corrupt behavior of their leaders acceptable?
The "they don't owe you anything" argument isn't very good. Organizations do things that affect their public image. Nike, Bud Light, etc. don't "owe you anything." Except for the fact that public backlash and loss of demand is important for organizations. Public image is important for a political organization like TPUSA... and if they want to clear up this issue, which THEY CREATED for themselves - we didn't ask for them to create this "Charlie appointing Erika" audio clip. They made it, and the people noticed it was chopped up, added b-roll, and edited. So we are asking, since they put it on us, to clarify whether it is authentic...
If they will not release it, and choose not to be transparent, then fine. But do not expect the backlash and lack of trust to fade. It will only increase. They can play this political spin game if they want to, but people see right through that nowadays and we are sick and tired of it.
They literally have the opportunity to prove their critics wrong. Like I said, it's a great opportunity. The solution is very simple, and every day they gaslight or call Candace Owens unhinged for asking is just another day they continue to lose the trust of the every day American person.