What specific claims did Candace Owens make about Erika Kirk and when were they first published?

1. What Owens specifically claimed — the core allegations

Owens said flight‑tracking records showed two Egyptian Air Force/C-130 type aircraft (identified in reporting as SU‑BTT/SU‑BND or similar registrations) overlapped with Erika Kirk’s travel or locations dozens of times between 2022 and September 2025; she presented counts commonly reported as about 68–73 overlaps and argued those overlaps imply long‑running surveillance of Erika, not Charlie, and could connect to Charlie Kirk’s assassination ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.

2. Where and when those claims were first published or broadcast

The specific “Erika was being tracked” formulation and the detailed overlap counts were released by Owens in a mid‑November 2025 episode and accompanying posts: reporting ties the disclosures to a November 17, 2025 livestream/podcast episode titled Operation Mocking‑Plane and to social posts around November 17–18, 2025 when Owens promoted a big reveal and shared flight‑data claims ^{[1] [2] [5] [4]}.

3. How many overlaps she reported and the variation in counts

Multiple outlets quote slightly different tallies from Owens’s presentation: some articles report “nearly 70” or “about 70” overlaps (often rounded), others give 68 overlaps, and several specifically state “73” or “73 times.” In short, the reported figures in media coverage cluster around 68–73 overlaps for the two Egyptian aircraft with Erika Kirk’s documented locations ^{[4] [2] [3] [1]}.

4. Additional details Owens tied to the claim

Owens said those same Egyptian aircraft were at Provo Airport on the day of Charlie Kirk’s shooting and suggested one plane briefly transponded or powered on the morning of the attack; she also said the material came from a citizen sleuth who compiled flight records (described by Owens as a “pregnant mommy sleuth”) and that the pattern had been overlooked until she publicized it ^{[2] [5] [1]}.

5. How the claims were received inside conservative circles and beyond

Coverage shows Owens’s allegations caused internal fractures on the right: some conservative figures pushed back, warning her lines of inference risk implicating Erika by association, while other outlets amplified the theory. Reporting also notes backlash and discussion of potential legal consequences for Owens from Erika Kirk ^{[6] [7]}.

6. What the reporting does — and does not — establish from the available sources

Available sources report what Owens said (the overlaps, dates, plane IDs she cited and the November 17–18, 2025 timing) but they do not independently confirm the flight‑data analysis or establish motive, intent, or that the overlaps represent directed surveillance rather than coincidental routing or data artifacts; several outlets explicitly frame the matter as an unverified conspiracy claim rather than a proven link ^{[2] [4] [3]}. If you are asking whether independent authorities corroborated Owens’s technical assertions, available sources do not mention independent verification by government investigators in these items ^{[2] [4]}.

7. Disagreements, caveats and journalistic context

Media accounts vary in specific numbers and wording (68, nearly 70, 73), reflecting either how Owens presented the data or how outlets rounded or interpreted it; some reports emphasize Owens’s certainty and others highlight the lack of corroboration and the political fallout of her allegations ^{[3] [1] [2] [4]}. Those variations matter: a claim framed as “nearly 70 overlaps” reads differently than a precise forensic assertion of targeted tracking, and outlets note Owens relied on a third‑party sleuth and public flight trackers rather than disclosed intelligence confirmations ^{[5] [2]}.

8. Takeaway for readers seeking verification

If you want to verify Owens’s specific flight‑tracking assertions, the reporting documents where she made them (mid‑November 2025 livestream/podcast and social posts) and the plane identifiers and overlap counts she cited, but the available articles do not show independent confirmation from aviation authorities or intelligence agencies; follow‑up reporting or primary flight‑data analysis would be required to corroborate or refute the technical elements Owens presented ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

Sources cited: reporting compiled from articles and summaries of Owens’s November 17–18, 2025 presentations and social posts as documented in the provided items ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]}.