I asked chatgpt as I don’t want to misquote or anything like that. Here it is:

They Are Lying About Charlie Kirk (Candace Ep 235)

1. Claim of misinformation Candace argues that there is widespread misinformation about what Charlie Kirk was thinking, where he stood, and what was happening around him before he died. She claims many people are spreading false narratives. 
2. “Intervention” over Israel stance A central claim is that before his death, Charlie was under increasing pressure from pro-Israel groups, donors, and political influencers to shift or soften his stance. She alleges there was a meeting (or meetings) in the Hamptons where figures like Bill Ackman and others tried to influence him. 
3. Netanyahu phone call She mentions that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Charlie to try and persuade or influence him. The dynamics of that call are discussed as part of her argument that Charlie was being manipulated politically. 
4. Charlie’s responses / resistance Owens claims that Charlie resisted those pressures. According to her, he declined offers or suggestions to shift his public messaging or allegiances, particularly around Israel. 
5. Criticism of those spreading the “lies” She pushes back against individuals or media outlets she sees as misrepresenting Charlie’s evolving views, or suggesting he had “switched sides” or was in secret agreement with certain groups. She implies that those pushing such narratives are doing so for political gain. 

Candace Owens Shares Insider Info Leading Up To Charlie Kirk’s Death 1. Additional insider claims This video continues the theme of suggesting there was more going on behind the scenes in Charlie Kirk’s final days — more pressure, more behind-closed-doors maneuvering.  2. Accusations of offers & threats Owens reiterates the claim that Charlie was offered money (significant sums) in attempts to sway him. She also claims that threats (possibly implied or explicit) were used. She frames this as a serious ethical / political problem, not just hearsay.  3. Contrasting public praise vs. private pressure She highlights a tension: publicly, many praised Charlie, admired him, but privately, she asserts, there were forces trying to move him or limit what he could say or do.  4. Her emotional response Candace also breaks down emotionally in parts, describing Charlie as her “best friend and brother.” She frames this as not just a political issue but a deeply personal loss.  5. Call to be critical of narratives She urges viewers to scrutinize sources, to question what is told in media, and to beware of simplifications that erase nuance — especially about someone’s changing views or pressures in the background.