Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro did not hold back when he shared his thoughts on the recent debate between Candace Owens and Andrew Wilson about the murder of Charlie Kirk. The debate, which took place on August 14, 2026, lasted over three hours and was moderated by Patrick Bet-David. Shapiro, who has been publicly feuding with Owens for months, called the entire discussion a waste of time for everyone involved.
The debate centered on the killing of Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and Turning Point USA founder, who was shot and killed at Utah Valley University on September 10, 2025. Tyler Robinson is the suspect facing prosecution for Kirk’s murder. Owens has repeatedly questioned the official account and suggested that Robinson was set up as a “patsy” by various groups including the U.S. government, Israel, or Turning Point USA itself. Wilson, a conservative commentator and firearms expert, argued that the evidence clearly points to Robinson as the killer.
Ben Shapiro Calls the Debate a Waste of Time
Shapiro addressed the debate on his show, The Ben Shapiro Show, on August 17, 2026. He explained that debates are only useful under two conditions: when you can convince the person you are debating, or when you can convince the audience watching. According to Shapiro, neither of those things happened on Friday.
“Debate is sometimes useful and sometimes it’s just not useful. It’s just not. Now, there are two possible reasons for debate to be useful. First, when you might convince the person you’re debating and second, when you might convince the audience. If neither one of those things is true, you’re probably wasting your time. Well, I think it’s fair to say a lot of people wasted their time last Friday.”
Shapiro argued that the discussion failed to change anyone’s mind about who killed Charlie Kirk. He also pointed out that the money involved in the debate created a “moral” problem. Andrew Wilson had offered $300,000 to Candace Owens to participate in the debate.
“When you debate for money over the matter of whether a person who clearly murdered somebody, murdered somebody, and whether the person who is claiming that the true murderer might in fact be his wife, might in fact be his best friend, might in fact be people who surround him, what you are doing is granting the imprimatur of decency to a debate that is indecent at its heart.”
Shapiro Says Owens Is ‘Divorced’ From the Truth
During the debate, Wilson repeatedly asked Owens to provide positive evidence supporting her claims that Tyler Robinson was innocent in Kirk’s murder. Owens responded by suggesting the involvement of other forces. Shapiro reacted sharply to this exchange.
Shapiro said that Candace Owens is “divorced” from the truth. He claimed that throughout the entire debate, she failed to present any factual evidence for her theories about Robinson’s role in Charlie Kirk’s death.
Shapiro also slammed Owens after she mentioned that her audience “vibes” with her content about Kirk’s murder and the theories linked to it. This was not the first time Shapiro has criticized Owens over her handling of the Kirk case.
The Longstanding Feud Between Shapiro and Owens
The tension between Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens goes back months. Both were once colleagues at The Daily Wire, but their relationship has turned into a very public feud. In July 2026, Shapiro accused Owens of “working to acquit” Charlie Kirk’s alleged murderer.
Shapiro responded to Owens after she posted screenshots of old text messages with Kirk that suggested Kirk did not like Shapiro. She captioned the post:
“This your daily reminder that Charlie Kirk always hated Ben Shapiro— he thought he was an Israel-First Jew supremacist. And for years, Andrew Kolvet pretended to hate Ben too until the moment Charlie died.”
Shapiro replied on X, saying he does not care about personal drama. He wrote:
“See, here’s the thing: I don’t really care about personal drama. I’ve said repeatedly that Charlie and I weren’t best friends. Maybe you were best friends with Charlie. Maybe not. I don’t know, nor do I care. For ten months, you’ve been slandering Charlie’s wife, his friends, and all of the people he worked with. You’re working to acquit his murderer. You’re spreading conspiratorial poison for cash. That’s something anyone of decency should condemn.”
Owens has consistently pointed fingers at various parties since Kirk’s death, including Israeli operatives, Turning Point USA, and the U.S. military. She has also targeted Erika Kirk, Charlie’s widow, and Turning Point USA in her public statements.
Andrew Wilson’s Challenge and the Debate Buildup
The debate between Owens and Wilson did not happen overnight. Wilson had been challenging Owens to defend her claims in a public setting for months. The public challenge dates back to March 2026, when Owens invited critics to debate her views. Wilson accepted, and the exchanges continued through livestreams, interviews, and social media posts.
In August 2026, Wilson appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast and offered Owens $300,000 to debate him over the conspiracies surrounding Charlie Kirk’s murder. Owens responded with a counteroffer of $500,000 and set her own conditions for the debate. The two spent August 7 publicly arguing over the details, including the venue, format, moderator, and exact topics. Owens posted what she called her “final offer,” saying she would accept the initial $300,000 but wanted the debate in her studio with her choice of moderator.
Despite the back-and-forth, they eventually reached an agreement, and the debate took place on August 14 with Patrick Bet-David as moderator.
What Happened During the Debate
The debate lasted over three hours and covered the evidence in the Charlie Kirk murder case. Owens maintained that Tyler Robinson was set up and that other forces were involved. Wilson argued that the evidence against Robinson was strong.
During the debate, Owens acknowledged that she had previously misinterpreted testimony regarding DNA profiles found on the rifle connected to the case. She clarified that the testimony did not establish that Lance Twigs’ DNA was on the gun. Wilson pointed out that Robinson’s fingerprints were on the weapon, which was a family heirloom passed down to him. He admitted he was not sure why some fingerprints were degraded but argued that did not prove Robinson’s innocence.
Owens also questioned why Robinson’s fingerprints were more degraded than other prints on the weapon. However, she did not provide evidence to support her claim that there is “zero chance” Robinson killed Kirk.
Related:
Public Reaction and Divided Opinions
The debate has generated mixed reactions online. Some viewers believed Owens won the debate, while others felt Wilson clearly had the stronger argument. The Hill’s opinion piece described the debate as a clear victory for Wilson, stating that Owens had “no evidence whatsoever” to support her theories. The article also noted that Owens failed to provide a “single shred of evidence” that would help establish that Robinson was a patsy.
The debate has become a major talking point in conservative media circles. Shapiro’s reaction adds another layer to the ongoing drama, as he continues to distance himself from Owens and her theories about Kirk’s murder.
Owens has a large following, with about 6 million subscribers on YouTube. Her podcast remains one of the most popular in the country. Despite the criticism, she continues to share her views on the case through videos, interviews, and social media posts.
Also Read: Candace Owens Praises TPUSA UGA Leader’s ‘Classy’ Resignation Letter, Asks JD Vance to Read It
For more entertainment news and updates on the latest happenings in the world of podcasts and commentary, keep reading VvipTimes. We bring you the stories that matter, breaking down complex topics into easy-to-understand articles.
Leave a Reply