How did Turning Point USA and OG Action staff react to the Owens–Kirk split?
Executive summary
The split between Candace Owens and Turning Point USA detonated into a public feud that TPUSA staff and allies largely framed as damaging conspiracy-mongering and internal betrayal, while Owens pushed back with leaked audio, accusations of financial opacity, and claims of staff intimidation; reporting documents heated public denunciations by TPUSA figures and unease among employees but does not comprehensively document OG Action staff reactions in available sources [1] [2] [3]. Coverage of the dispute shows a movement riven between calls to silence Owens for the good of the organization and her counterclaim that TPUSA leadership betrayed Charlie Kirk and sought to suppress dissent [4] [5].
1. TPUSA leadership publicly rebuked Owens and tried to shut down conspiracies
Turning Point’s public posture has been to condemn Owens’ most explosive claims and to urge an end to conspiratorial chatter that the organization says distracts from its mission; Erika Kirk, now TPUSA’s CEO, directly told reporters and audiences to “Stop” in response to Owens’ suggestions about outside involvement in Charlie Kirk’s killing and framed those claims as profiteering off a tragedy [1]. TPUSA organized private and public rebuttals to Owens’ allegations—staffers and allies signaled they had waited months for Owens to cease before mounting formal responses, and at least one group of Kirk’s friends prepared a formal rebuttal to her accusations [5] [4].
2. Conference floor fractures: staff and allied speakers turned on each other
At Turning Point’s AmericaFest, the split played out onstage and in the halls, where prominent conservative voices used the platform to excoriate Owens’ narratives and to warn against elevating figures they called “grifters”; Ben Shapiro explicitly denounced Owens and others who amplified conspiracies, turning the conference into a visible battleground over how staff and speakers should handle the fallout [4]. Reporters found the event punctuated by pointed references to Owens—some speakers framed her as a destabilizing force whose stories threatened the organization’s credibility and legal posture around the ongoing investigation [6] [4].
3. Staff-level reactions were mixed: grief, pressure, fear, and allegations of retaliation
Internal friction among TPUSA employees is reflected in leaked audio and Owens’ published materials: Owens released clips in which she says staff told her they were uncomfortable taking time off to grieve after Charlie Kirk’s death because of Erika Kirk’s messaging about continuing work, and she circulated a video purporting to show a staffer being fired amid the dispute [2] [7]. Other reporting documents claims from Owens that staff were being hauled into offices and questioned about their “allegiance to Erika,” and that some employees feared repercussions for raising questions—though independent verification of firings and internal coercion remains contested in the public record [7] [8].
4. Financial and legal lines of attack widened the schism
Owens publicly accused TPUSA of raising extraordinary sums after Kirk’s death while targeting smaller independent creators who questioned the group, and highlighted alleged cease-and-desist letters sent to critics—charges that TPUSA has pushed back against while also pursuing legal warnings to some online commentators [3] [8]. In turn, TPUSA framed much of Owens’ campaign as conspiracy theorizing that risks tainting a jury pool and undermining their fundraising and operational stability, a line repeatedly emphasized by leadership at public events and interviews [1] [9].
5. Limits of reporting — OG Action staff and a full internal picture remain opaque
Available sources concentrate on Turning Point USA’s internal dynamics, public statements by Erika Kirk and allied speakers, Owens’ leaks and public posts, and reactions from prominent conservative figures; there is little or no sourced reporting in the provided documents specifically describing how OG Action staff responded to the Owens–Kirk rupture, so conclusions about OG Action can’t be drawn from these materials [10] [9]. Where claims about firings, intimidation, or financial misconduct appear, reporting often notes they are alleged and contested, leaving room for further independent reporting or internal documentation to clarify staff-level realities [2] [8].