Pia

[Pia @smat11_]

@AndrewKolvet Mate, surely @MrsErikaKirk and @TPUSA can just file a lawsuit against the reporter that wrote it. 🤡 stop spewing more garbage on X

[Sukhoi Su-57 "Felon"👑ZOV @75Sukhoi]

How did this idiot🤡 end up as President of 🇺🇦Ukraine?

[Pia @smat11_]

@PBOnPoint @KatWild That’s fair. Just pointing out that she did, in fact, say it.

[Pia @smat11_]

@KatWild @PBOnPoint She said she believed he never set foot on UVU on her show with Shawn Ryan.

[Candace Owens @RealCandaceO]

I’m glad you finally came to the surface, rat. Your previous employees told me it was you and Erika that were teaming up with the YouTubers to put out the utterly fake narrative that Charlie and I were not friends and he had “anxiety”. You also worked together to lie about his pull toward Catholicism and to put out the deranged narrative that I secretly loved Charlie and hadn’t spoken to him since 2019 despite me touring with him through to May 2024.

Your lies are easy to debunk. I simply could not have demanded to speak at any TPUSA event because we had a speaker contract that rolled over annually, Andrew. This means I never ever had to beg or even request to speak at any event because I was contractually obligated to speak at every major TPUSA event, every year.

It’s also utterly ludicrous to suggest he didn’t pick up my calls because I never call. Any person who knows me knows I never pick up or call people. But you lie so much, I am going to accept this easy challenge to prove that you are a liar by releasing every single time I dialed Charlie’s number for the last 3 years.

As soon as I am back on air, that will be released. Gratefully, telephone logs go back 5 years. I simply prefer to text— and I thank God for that, as I’ve been able to debunk your lies about Charlie because of that habit.
Like I said, your number one problem is you are dumb.

Regarding your narrative that we never spoke, I literally just released Charlie and I discussing your partner Johnnie’s Moore’s demonic attack against ‘Christ is King’— a convo initiated by Charlie. Those messages are dated May 2025. But hey, let’s hear Charlie in his own words regarding our friendship—Shall we?

Here is Charlie, captured August 21st 2025—3 weeks before he died. He made it clear on stage that I was his friend and he wouldn’t be morally blackmailed against our friendship by people like you.

Also the night before he died— he texted you guys saying he wanted me back at Amfest after your Zionist backers demanded I be put on ice for Amfest 2024. Why did he text Justin and tell him he wanted me back? Do you deny that happened?
Those were again, Charlie’s words. One of the last wishes he expressed.

So was Charlie lying to his audience (and to his team in private conversations) weeks before he died, Andrew or are you simply a special kind of demon for attempting to rewrite history and convince the world that his real friends were people like Ben Shapiro and the very Zionists he was fighting against for his freedom?

Despite the millions of dollars spent— the world sees what is real. Truth cannot be destroyed.

Neither can Charlie’s voice. Here it is:

[Pia @smat11_]

For the lack of a better word, @AndrewKolvet is a lying clown. Did he forget about HIS screenshot of their group chat where @charliekirk11 undeniably said he was thinking of getting Candace to speak at TPUSA again? @RealCandaceO didn’t have to ask, let alone “demand”. Disgusting.

[Andrew Kolvet @AndrewKolvet]

Candace, you and Charlie were not friends. He managed you. He kept things light and polite so you wouldn’t turn on the org.

Show me any proof of genuine friendship from the last 12 months of his life? From the last 18 months? From the last 24 months? Not some 2018 text. Something recent.

You gave him anxiety whenever you called or texted asking (demanding) to speak at our events. He made me or Justin deal with you and George. This is why when you tried to hire me in Feb 2024 for PR I agreed to go along with it against my better judgment, because Charlie asked me to keep you close and protect the org from you. (The publicist I tried to hire to run point prayed about it and felt the Lord told her a firm no, and so, I ultimately declined).

This is your central, foundational lie.
You were not his friend.
You are not his defender.
You were his tormenter.
And now you torment his wife and the organization he built.

Candace, you are a fraud.

[Pia @smat11_]

@BlakeSNeff Still waiting for the Aspen video Blakey

[Pia @smat11_]

@BlakeSNeff You’re right Blake — Utterly disgusting. Release the actual Aspen video!

[Pia @smat11_]

@netanyahu Imprison this criminal.

[Pia @smat11_]

@nosoup4knowles yeah, nah. Try again

[Pia @smat11_]

@TheGreekUSA @AndrewKolvet @BlakeSNeff What's more amusing is that they have no idea how embarrassing this whole thing is for them.

[The Greek American 🇺🇸🇬🇷 @TheGreekUSA]

Lmfao. Who the fuck gives these morons @AndrewKolvet and @BlakeSNeff their talking points?

You ACTUALLY think anyone believes you intentionally put out a fake video of Charlie, only to get busted by Candace with the full video- while you both berated people who said IT WAS FAKE.

They were right. God damn I can’t wait till these motherfuckers are in prison.

If you donate to this fraudulent brand or watch these foreign intel assets you are brain dead

[Pia @smat11_]

@paramounttactcl Thats one way to say you’re upset you & your friends at @TPUSA have been getting caught in your lies. What an admission. Which is so you 😂

Btw, don’t you wish you were as tactical? 😉

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

Chris Nolan desecrated the Odyssey so that he would be eligible for an Academy Award …

[Pia @smat11_]

@paramounttactcl 😂😂 you’re a clown.

Gary: this is a photo of Erika’s kids to prove she wasn’t at fort Huachuca.

Also Gary: who gives if it’s actually Erika’s kids? It proves Erika was with her kids 🤡

[Pia @smat11_]

@paramounttactcl @correamiente @RealCandaceO We all remember how you tried to convince us that Erika was with her kids on Sept 9 by showing Andrew’s messages and fake photo 😂

Candace just doesn’t make the same mistakes as you 🤷🏿‍♀️

[Xavier Poussard @XavierPoussard]

🚨Alors qu'une première décision est attendue le 28 avril dans la procédure qui les oppose à Candace Owens, Brigitte et Emmanuel Macron trouvent un bien curieux allié en la personne de... Donald Trump !

"La cote de Candace Owens, qui n’a jamais été très élevée, a encore chuté. Son attaque contre la Première Dame de France [Brigitte Macron] est méprisable. Je crois que, dans ce cas, sans vérification, elle est un individu extrêmement à faible QI!" a posté le président des États-Unis sur Truth Social, le réseau social dont il est le seul utilisateur, remettant encore l’affaire Brigitte Macron (Becoming Brigitte) au cœur de l'actualité.

Pour rappel, personne en France ou aux États-Unis n'a été condamné ni même poursuivi pour avoir affirmé que "Brigitte", né de sexe masculin sous le nom de Jean-Michel Trogneux, s’était lié au futur président français Emmanuel Macron, alors âgé de 14 ans, au sein de l’atelier théâtre qu’"elle" animait… C'est ce couple sordide, dont émane une forte odeur de pédophilie, que la branche parisienne des Rothschild (par ailleurs employeur de Jeffrey Epstein) ont imposé aux Français via un coup d’Etat médiatico-judiciaire afin de ruiner la France sur tous les plans.

C'est donc le moment ou jamais de découvrir ou de redécouvrir Becoming Brigitte, l’enquête de référence, intégralement sourcée, devenue à la fois une affaire d’Etat et le terrain de jeu du combat spirituel contemporain.

[Pia @smat11_]

@CandaceOwensPod Thinking that you can discredit @RealCandaceO by reactivating her DW social accounts and posting videos like this is one of the most pathetic things a media company could do. You should be sued to oblivion @benshapiro

[Pia @smat11_]

@EvanAKilgore @RealCandaceO @cabot_phillips You're trying a bit too hard there Evan

[John Mappin @JohnMappin]

Dear Alex,

@RealAlexJones

If one were a gentleman with basic manners and understood the history of the suppression of freedom of speech and the mechanisms of slavery, one simply would not act in the way that you and others seem to be acting.

You are far from alone in such actions.

There is a particular moment when a free voice stops being argued with and starts being diagnosed.

It is an unmistakable tell.

The facts are no longer confronted, the reasoning is no longer challenged, and debate gives way to insinuation.

"Something must be wrong with her", they say.

"He is unstable."

"She needs help."

The Old Trick, Reheated: Psychiatry as a Political Weapon

When you suggests that Candace Owens @RealCandaceO has mental-health issues, we are not witnessing a medical opinion. We are watching an ancient political reflex try to reassert itself.

It is the reflex of capture.

This is not disagreement. It is attempted character liquidation.

And worse than that, it is not the behaviour of a gentleman.

From Argument to Asylum - Historically, psychiatry has been the velvet glove over the iron fist of power. When states encounter voices that will not bend, psychiatry is mobilised to do what censorship alone cannot: to delegitimise the speaker, rather than the speech.

The Soviet Union perfected this technique.

Dissidents were not refuted, they were diagnosed with “sluggish schizophrenia,” a convenient condition whose principal symptom appeared to be disagreement with the state.

The asylum replaced the courtroom. The white coat replaced the black robe. One could be locked away not for being wrong, but for being dangerously correct.

This was not an anomaly. It was method.

Elsewhere, political non-conformity was routinely reframed as psychological deviance. Psychiatry became a bureaucratic solvent, dissolving inconvenient truths into supposed disorders. The pattern is consistent and deeply instructive: when truth threatens power, diagnosis is cheaper than rebuttal.

Western democracies flatter themselves that such crudities belong to history. They do not. They have merely been rebranded.

The modern rebranding - Today, the asylum has been replaced by the smear, the section order by the insinuation, the padded cell by the social-media whisper. The language is softer, the intentions unchanged. “Concern for wellbeing” now does the work once done by iron bars.

To suggest that Candace Owens has mental-health problems is not concern. It is an attempted rhetorical kill-shot. It signals to the audience that her arguments need not be examined.

One may dismiss the ideas by discrediting the mind that holds them.

This is the language of institutions, not of honourable debate.

It is a trick usually reserved for committees, compliance departments, and state-adjacent NGOs. When it appears in supposedly anti-establishment circles, something has gone badly awry.

Capture Is Revealed by Conduct - Capture rarely announces itself.

It reveals itself in tone.

In habits. In the sudden adoption of the very methods one once claimed to oppose.

There was a time when questioning a woman’s sanity in public argument was recognised as coarse and unbecoming.

One might call her mistaken, reckless, even dangerous, but to imply mental instability was understood to be a breach of basic standards of conduct.

A gentleman does not behave this way.

Gentlemanly conduct is not about class or affectation. It is about restraint, proportion, and the refusal to reach for dishonourable weapons when losing an argument.

To accuse an opponent of mental illness is to concede that reason has failed.

It is not courageous. It is mentally lazy.

Psychiatry and Power: A Brief Reminder

Psychiatry’s entanglement with power is not accidental. From its earliest institutional forms, it acquired the authority to define what is “normal,” “acceptable,” and “safe.” That authority has always been tempting to those who govern.

Once such a framework exists, it becomes irresistible. Criminality can be reframed as illness. Dissent as imbalance. Conviction as pathology. The dissenter is no longer wrong, he is unwell.

This manoeuvre is seductive precisely because it bypasses debate. One cannot argue with a diagnosis. One can only submit to it.

Why This Matters Now - Candace Owens represents something profoundly irritating to the managerial class: a coherent, articulate voice that refuses to be managed. She speaks plainly. She does not ask permission.

She does not accept the approved vocabulary.

Such people have always attracted psychiatric suspicion from those who cannot defeat them intellectually.

When figures who claim to oppose authoritarianism begin deploying the same diagnostic language as the authorities, we should take notice. Capture does not always involve money. Sometimes it involves the erosion of standards, the abandonment of good conduct, and the quiet decision that expedience matters more than principle.

The line that must not be crossed - There is a line in civilised discourse. On one side lies disagreement, however fierce. On the other lies dehumanisation. Psychiatry used as insult sits firmly on the wrong side of that line.

To cross it is to admit defeat.

It is also to reveal one’s manners.

A gentleman reaches for facts, logic, wit, or silence. He does not reach for the asylum. He understands that sanity is demonstrated, not proclaimed, and never weaponised.

Final Word - The suggestion that Candace Owens suffers from mental-health issues tells us nothing about her and a great deal about the climate in which such remarks are now made. It is the old authoritarian reflex, lightly polished, deployed by those who ought to know better.

History is unforgiving to those who mistake diagnosis for debate.

And public discourse is poorer for it.

I hope this helps you Alex.

There is so much good work left for you to do. It is a shame to sully your name in this way.

Warmest Regards and a Very Happy Christmas to you and may you receive, all the blessings of the season.

John and Irina Mappin.

@ImMappin

P.S. For those reading this letter who would appreciate simplicity in this matter. Candace is simply seeking clarity over who killed her friend Charlie Kirk, what happened that day and why.

She has some valid questions.

If you can help her get them answered please do so.

You can watch her entire investigation on her U tube Channel.

If you can help her debunk any of the information that is coming to light, please do so.

She would appreciate it.

Just do so politely and with grace, with honesty and with accuracy and we are sure that any disruption that naturally occurs when someone is publicly executed and such a crime is investigated for the truth of what happened, will be kept to a minimum.

N.B. Dont lie.

N.N.B. Don't cover up the lies of others.

I hope this communication is received in the spirit with which it was written.

There are one or two others that might do well to understand this so perhaps you might share it with them too.

Thank You.