Ex-Security Chief Sues Candace Owens for Defamation Over Kirk Death Claims

Former security chief Brian Harpole is suing Candace Owens for defamation. He says her claims about him being involved in a plot to kill Charlie Kirk are false and hurt his job.

Brian Harpole, former security chief for Charlie Kirk, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens. The suit, lodged in a Tennessee federal court on Thursday, alleges Owens made false statements that damaged Harpole's career.

Charlie Kirk’s Former Security Chief Sues Candace Owens for Defamation - 1

At the heart of the legal challenge are Owens' public accusations that Harpole was involved in a plot to assassinate Charlie Kirk. Harpole’s complaint states Owens propagated these theories on her podcast and social media, including claims of his presence at a military base meeting prior to Kirk’s death. Harpole asserts these allegations are demonstrably false and have severely harmed his professional reputation.

Charlie Kirk’s Former Security Chief Sues Candace Owens for Defamation - 2

The lawsuit details a specific accusation made by Owens on December 12, stating, "Brian Harpole has already been caught lying about what transpired on that day." It also points to Owens' claims that Harpole attended a conspiracy meeting at Fort Huachuca on the day before Kirk's assassination and colluded with the government. Harpole's filing contends these statements were made with reckless disregard for the truth, causing him to lose clients and contracts.

Read More: DOJ Acts on Supreme Court Ruling Against Racial Gerrymandering

Charlie Kirk’s Former Security Chief Sues Candace Owens for Defamation - 3

Owens, who succeeded Kirk as CEO of Turning Point USA, has publicly responded to the lawsuit. She indicated awareness of the legal action, stating she is "pretty accustomed to how lawsuits work." Owens also questioned why Harpole had not contacted her directly about the claims or issued a retraction demand, suggesting his silence was noteworthy. She further commented on X, implying Harpole’s career struggles might stem from the circumstances of his departure from his last job rather than her statements.

The dispute appears to stem from events surrounding Kirk's death at a Utah college campus in September. Harpole, who was present during the incident, claims Owens initially accused him of security protocol failures before escalating to allegations of direct involvement in Kirk's killing. This conflict has also drawn in Kirk’s wife, Erika Kirk, who now leads Turning Point USA.

Read More: Trump dissatisfied with Iran offer, Hormuz Strait still blocked

This is not the first time Owens has faced legal scrutiny for her public statements. The lawsuit cites a previous instance where Owens made unfounded claims about French First Lady Brigitte Macron, a falsehood that also led to a defamation suit against her. The current legal battle underscores the tension between public discourse, especially within politically charged spheres, and the potential for damaging falsehoods to cross into actionable defamation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Why did Brian Harpole sue Candace Owens?
Brian Harpole, former security chief for Charlie Kirk, sued Candace Owens for defamation in a Tennessee federal court on Thursday. He claims Owens made false statements about him being involved in a plot to assassinate Charlie Kirk, which damaged his career.
Q: What specific claims did Candace Owens make?
The lawsuit states Owens accused Harpole on her podcast and social media of being involved in a plot to assassinate Charlie Kirk. This included claims that Harpole attended a meeting at Fort Huachuca on the day before Kirk's death and colluded with the government.
Q: How have Owens' statements affected Harpole?
Harpole's lawsuit claims Owens' statements were made with reckless disregard for the truth. He states these false allegations have caused him to lose clients and contracts, severely harming his professional reputation.
Q: What has Candace Owens said about the lawsuit?
Candace Owens acknowledged the lawsuit and stated she is accustomed to such legal actions. She questioned why Harpole had not contacted her directly or issued a retraction demand, and suggested his career issues might be unrelated to her statements.