Candace Owens’ comments about Charlie Kirk’s relationship with Erika Kirk have sparked online backlash after journalist Natalie Jean Beisner criticized her remarks. Owens argued that intelligence does not prevent people from making mistakes in relationships. Critics say the discussion is insensitive given Kirk’s death, while supporters believe Owens was explaining how emotions can cloud judgment.
As more comments and criticisms about Charlie Kirk’s death come to light online, the public debate about it grows stronger. A recent post by journalist Natalie Jean Beisner brought up Candace Owens’s comments about Kirk’s relationship with Erika Kirk again. The exchange shows how emotional and divided the conversation has become, especially when personal relationships and public grief mix with political commentary.
Candace Owens defends her perspective in “Bride of Charlie”
Beisner’s social media post criticized the tone of Owens’ remarks about Erika Kirk, suggesting that the comments crossed a moral line given the tragic circumstances surrounding Kirk’s death. Her post questioned how the discussion had shifted from sympathy to suspicion.
Israel attacks Iran
In a strongly worded message, she wrote: “How did Erika Kirk scam a genius like Charlie? The more I hear her past interviews, the dumber she sounds.”
She then thought about Owens’ bigger point about trust and human mistakes. She pointed out that Owens saw Kirk’s relationship choices as a sign of normal human weakness, not as a sign of intellectual failure. Beisner disagreed with that framing, saying that the conversation felt too personal and harsh. In her YouTube series Bride of Charlie, Candace Owens answered a comment from a viewer who asked how Kirk could have been fooled. Her response focused on the difference between intelligence and emotional judgment. She argued that even brilliant individuals can misread relationships.Owens said: “Gracie Lou writes, I would be so blessed to have a friend like you that said, how did Erica Kirk scam a genius like Charlie? The more I hear her past interviews, the dumber she sounds. I don’t get it. Shaken my head.Uh, this stuff with men and women is biblical. You go to Genesis. I mean, it’s not, this is not about an IQ of people saying Charlie was a genius. How could he hire people around him? IQ and EQ are totally different things. And on the topic of women, I Charlie wasn’t a genius. He just wasn’t a genius on the topic of women. Don’t be ridiculous. And you grow to trust people. People forget how young Charlie was.So even in terms of who was around him, you make mistakes. We are all human. It doesn’t matter how genius you are. Um, interpersonal relationships, that’s an entirely different dynamic. I have been friends with people and those friendships have fallen apart. I would say I have a pretty high emotional, um, I have a high EQ definitively and sometimes you get it wrong.It’s, this is all normal stuff. And so I think people keep going, well, he was so brilliant. He was so brilliant. And then he sees a girl and things change and you’re no longer thinking clearly and emotions get into the mix. We’ve all been there before. We have all been there before.So I, I do think, well, I know for a fact he didn’t know a lot of these things about Erica cause I was there and we, I’m finding this stuff out. He definitively did not know. He thought it was all organic. And I have my questions about that. Tyler Boyer, he’s an important guy.”
Owens’ remarks sparked strong reactions online. Supporters argue she was offering a realistic perspective on human relationships. Critics say that the comments could make people stop grieving and start guessing.The talk is now at the center of a bigger cultural debate. It makes us think about loyalty, grief, and how famous people talk about the people who were left behind after a tragedy. Go to Source
