Which conservative leaders have defended Candace Owens and what reasons did they give?
Executive summary
Multiple conservative figures and outlets have publicly reacted to Candace Owens’s recent claims — most responses range from defensive echoing of her skepticism to sharp distancing. Reporting shows Owens has made high-profile allegations about a Macron-ordered assassination plot and conspiratorial claims around Charlie Kirk’s death; mainstream conservative organizations like Turning Point USA and several commentators are cited in coverage either criticizing her or being implicated by her, but available sources do not list a comprehensive roll-call of conservative leaders who have defended Owens outright (not found in current reporting) [1][2][3].
1. The claim that prompted reactions — what Owens said and where
Candace Owens publicly asserted that French government actors plotted to assassinate her and has promoted a linked set of conspiracy theories about the September killing of Charlie Kirk; she posted threads on X and promised to “name names” and provide evidence, while also pausing her podcast as she promised “full details” [1][2][4]. European outlets summarized her accusation as alleging President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron paid for an assassination; reporting emphasizes she has supplied no public evidence to date [5][1].
2. Which conservative leaders have defended Owens — what the sources show
Available reporting does not provide a clear, sourced list of senior conservative leaders who have publicly defended Owens’s specific Macron-assassination or expanded Charlie Kirk claims. Instead, coverage records a mix of private and public reactions within conservative media: some podcasters and commentators have echoed her skepticism about official narratives, while established conservative institutions have faced her accusations rather than issuing blanket defenses [2][3][4]. Several right-leaning commentators are quoted criticizing others or warning about Owens, but direct, named defenses of her recent extraordinary allegations are not documented in the supplied sources (not found in current reporting).
3. Who has pushed back — conservative organizations and commentators
Turning Point USA and figures in its orbit appear repeatedly in these reports — but the relationship is adversarial: Owens has accused TPUSA leadership of betraying Charlie Kirk and promised evidence; TPUSA itself “went scorched earth” at Owens in at least one headline and media reaction pieces show commentators urging TPUSA to prepare for legal pushback, implying institutional distancing rather than defense [6][3][7]. Other conservative voices — journalists and podcasters — are cited as criticizing Owens’ rhetoric or warning it risks real-world harm [4][3].
4. Reasons cited by allies or sympathetic commentators — themes seen in coverage
Where conservative commentators appear sympathetic to Owens’s broader posture, they emphasize distrust of official narratives, the need for more transparency, and the value of pursuing alleged irregularities in high-profile deaths; Owens herself framed her work as revealing betrayals and promised documentary proof [2][4]. Those sympathetic lines are observational in the sources: commentators amplify Owens’s demand for answers about Kirk’s death and her claims of insider warnings, rather than supplying independent corroboration [2][4].
5. Reasons critics gave for distancing or condemning her claims
Multiple outlets and commentators pointed to the lack of public evidence and warned that spreading unproven allegations can be dangerous; European reporting explicitly notes Owens provided no evidence for the Macron claim and officials denied relevant military activity cited by her [5]. Media analysis frames her pattern of sensational allegations as a business model that drives audience growth but lacks substantiation — an argument made in Fortune and other outlets profiling the legal and reputational risks she now faces [8][9].
6. Legal and reputational context that shapes conservative responses
Owens is facing a 219-page defamation suit from the Macrons over prior claims, and Fortune describes how that lawsuit could threaten the controversy-driven business model that built her audience — a pressure point that likely influences how institutional conservatives respond publicly to her latest allegations [8][1]. The Delaware suit and prior visa cancellations and court rulings are part of the dossier media cite when explaining why other conservative leaders might be cautious about outright defense [1][8].
7. What reporting does not say — key omissions and limits
Available sources do not document a list of named conservative political leaders (e.g., elected officials, major party figures) who have publicly defended Owens’s recent Macron-assassination accusations; likewise, there is no sourced record here of independent evidence validating her claims (not found in current reporting) [1][5]. My summary is limited to the published coverage provided and does not reflect statements or private communications outside those sources.
8. Bottom line for readers
Conservative reaction in the press is fragmented: some commentators echo Owens’s demand for answers and amplify her claims, while institutions and many reporters emphasize the absence of evidence and the legal exposure those claims create. Readers should note that, in the supplied reporting, documented defenses are largely media-amplified sympathies and distrust-of-official-narrative themes rather than clear, documented public defenses from major conservative leaders [2][3][8].