What exactly did Candace Owens allege about Erica Kearney and Egyptian military planes?

1. What Owens actually said — the core allegation

Owens told listeners she received flight‑tracking records from an individual she described as an amateur “sleuth” and said two Egyptian military planes overlapped with Erika Kirk’s travel or known local locations dozens of times (reported figures vary: 68, nearly 70, 73 overlaps) between 2022 and September 2025; she also said one of the planes was at Provo airport on the day Charlie Kirk was shot and that one plane briefly powered up while the other remained on the ground ^{[5] [3] [1]}.

2. Specifics Owens publicized — plane IDs, counts, and scene details

Multiple outlets quote Owens or the materials she shared naming the aircraft by tail numbers (rendered in reporting as SU‑BTT/SU‑BND or SUBTT/SUBND), saying the pair matched Erika Kirk’s locations about 68–73 times and that 29 of those overlaps reportedly included Charlie Kirk as well; Owens also circulated vehicle license‑plate details and alleged links to ground support providers for the aircraft ^{[2] [6] [7]}.

3. The theory Owens proposes — motive and target

Owens advanced a theory that the surveillance pattern suggests Erika Kirk, not Charlie, was the likely target of sustained monitoring and implied a broader foreign‑linked “military operation” may have preceded the assassination; she framed the specific Provo airport sightings as reinforcing that theory and urged more investigation than the official narrative, naming possible financial and organizational motives within Turning Point USA ^{[1] [4]}.

4. What the reporting does — agreement, variation, and uncertainty

Press coverage consistently describes Owens’ claims but shows variation in the precise overlap count (reports cite 68, nearly 70, 73) and in tail‑number renderings; outlets uniformly attribute the data to Owens and to an anonymous sleuth rather than to independent verification, and none of the stories cites flight‑tracking databases or Egyptian officials confirming the alleged surveillance ^{[3] [4] [8]}.

5. Counterarguments and responses reported

Some journalists and commentators quoted in reporting and social posts have pushed back, saying Egypt would have no obvious reason to target a U.S. activist and calling the theory implausible; at least one Egyptian journalist publicly denounced Owens’ claims on social media, and outlets note critics warning that these conclusions rest on unverified data and amateur analysis ^{[9] [1]}.

6. What the available reporting does not show

Available sources do not include independent confirmation of the flight data from aviation databases, FBOs, Duncan Aviation, Egyptian authorities, or the FBI; they do not present authenticated chain‑of‑custody documentation for the records Owens cited, nor do they report any official statement from Egypt acknowledging the tail numbers or the alleged activity ^{[5] [1]}.

7. Why this matters — implications and the need for verification

If true, repeated overlaps of foreign military aircraft with a private U.S. citizen’s movements would be a serious matter; however, the reporting shows the claim currently rests on secondary materials circulated by Owens and an anonymous source, making independent validation essential before treating the allegation as factual ^{[4] [3]}.

8. Practical next steps for readers and reporters

Responsible follow‑up would seek primary flight‑tracking logs, tail‑number histories from civil/military registries, statements from aviation service providers reportedly involved, and commentary from Egyptian and U.S. authorities; until such sourcing appears in reporting, the allegation should be considered an unverified claim advanced by Owens and amplified by sympathetic outlets ^{[2] [5]}.

Sources cited above are the news reports and summaries that describe Owens’ statements and the reaction to them; those pieces record the allegations and skepticism but do not independently corroborate the flight‑tracking evidence Owens presented ^{[1] [4] [3]}.