Candace Owens has once again thrown a spotlight on the internal turmoil surrounding Turning Point USA, and this time her criticism cuts deeper than personal grievances. Her most recent comments make people think about money, power, and responsibility in a way that makes them uncomfortable.This is happening at a time when the conservative group is still dealing with the effects of a terrible loss. What started as a disagreement over comments made online has turned into a bigger fight about who has the power to tell the story and who should be quiet.

Candace Owens tears into Turning Point USA for “shameless” response to online critics

Owens’ frustration is rooted in what she sees as a glaring imbalance. On one side are independent creators, earning modest sums while publicly questioning the official investigation into Charlie Kirk’s killing. On the other is a political nonprofit that, according to Owens, has amassed staggering sums in donations and is now using legal pressure as a shield. Owens’ message resonated because it tapped into a wider fear that scrutiny is being discouraged rather than addressed.“I’m still stuck on the fact that Turning Point raised a quarter billion over a few months and felt zero shame attacking YouTubers for making “thousands of dollars” discussing the flaws of the investigation. The shamelessness of that PR strategy is absolutely wild to reflect on,” she wrote.The controversy escalated after YouTuber Zach de Gregorio claimed he received a cease and desist letter from Turning Point USA. His reporting focused on inconsistencies around drone usage at the Utah Valley University event where Kirk was killed. Owens did not mince words when reacting to that move, arguing it only amplified suspicion rather than restoring trust.“Difficult to put into words how terrible of an idea it was for Turning Point USA to send out this Cease and Desist letter. I’m at the point where I think someone internally absolutely detests Erika and permanently feeds her terrible ideas. It’s the only thing that makes sense at this point. I again offer my consulting services to TPUSA. For a monthly retainer, we can end this corporate shit show.”Owens has also alleged deeper fractures inside the organization, including claims about firings and fear among staff. While many of her assertions remain unverified, the public nature of her criticism has kept pressure on TPUSA leadership. Instead of quieting dissent, the legal pushback appears to have widened the debate, drawing more attention to questions about transparency, leadership style, and whether the organization’s response is helping or harming its credibility.