Where can the original screenshots Candace Owens posted be found and archived?
Executive summary
The screenshots at the center of Candace Owens’ October 2025 disclosure were posted publicly by Owens on social media and have been reproduced in news coverage; Primetimer directly reported that Owens “shared two screenshots” on October 23, 2025 and described the post as a “tweet” [1]. Major follow‑ups and competing screenshot releases were covered by outlets such as The Times of India, which reported a broader “screenshot war” after Owens’ posts [2].
1. Where the originals were posted: Owens’ own social feed
The primary location for the original screenshots is Candace Owens’ own social‑media account, where she publicly shared two images of purported chats on October 23, 2025 — a post reported by Primetimer and explicitly described there as a tweet [1]. Primetimer’s piece recounts the content and timing of Owens’ post and treats the images as material she herself released to her followers [1].
2. Where news organizations archived and reproduced them
News outlets that covered the disclosure reproduced those images and summarized their contents, creating secondary public records: Primetimer published the screenshots alongside its coverage of Owens’ post [1], and The Times of India reported on the ensuing “screenshot war,” noting other actors released their own screenshot material in response [2]. Those news stories therefore function as accessible archives of what Owens posted, insofar as they include reproductions and contemporaneous descriptions [1] [2].
3. Conflicting releases and counter‑archives
The record is not limited to Owens’ original share: according to The Times of India, other participants in the dispute—most notably Josh Hammer—later released their own screenshots as part of a public back‑and‑forth, which the paper framed as an attempt to counter Owens’ narrative and to document last messages between involved parties [2]. That reporting implies multiple competing archives exist: Owens’ original images, the media reproductions, and subsequent screenshots posted by other individuals [2].
4. What can — and cannot — be confirmed from the provided reporting
The supplied coverage confirms Owens’ posted screenshots and that media reproduced them [1] [2], but the materials in this packet do not supply direct URLs, platform archive links, or independent forensic verification of authenticity; the reporting records the posts and reactions but does not provide a primary public archive link such as a content‑permalink or Wayback snapshot within the cited items [1] [2]. Therefore, while Owens’ original post and media reproductions are documented in reporting, the exact original file locations and any independent archive copies are not specified in these sources [1] [2].
5. Reliability, motives and alternative views noted in reporting
The Times of India frames the episode as a “screenshot war,” signaling that competing narratives and motives are active: the outlet highlights that others released chats to rebut Owens’ claims and also situates Owens among a history of controversial public claims [2]. Primetimer’s piece focused on Owens’ framing of the screenshots and the public response, implying that the images were released to shape a narrative about internal communications [1]. Both sources therefore show the screenshots are evidence in an ongoing dispute rather than conclusive proof accepted by all parties [1] [2].
6. Practical takeaway for researchers
Based on the cited reporting, the origination point for the screenshots is Owens’ social feed on October 23, 2025 (as reported by Primetimer) and the media reproductions in outlets such as Primetimer and The Times of India now serve as accessible archival records of what she posted [1] [2]. This packet of sources does not include permalink archives or third‑party forensic analyses, so anyone seeking the original image files, timestamped metadata, or independent verification will need to consult Owens’ original social posts, platform archives, or dedicated archival services directly — none of which are provided in the supplied reporting [1] [2].