'The Greatest Evil': Why Candace Owens Called Erika Kirk's Swift CEO Appointment a 'Managerial Error'

The political commentary landscape has been consumed by the events following Charlie Kirk’s tragic assassination in September 2025. While the official investigation into the shooting continues, the internal drama at Turning Point USA (TPUSA) has exploded into a high-stakes public feud between the organization and its former star, Candace Owens.

The latest, and arguably most personal, volley came from Owens herself, who did not mince words when discussing the organization’s decision to immediately appoint Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, as the new CEO. In a recent discussion with commentator Russell Brand, Owens delivered a blunt critique: “I think they made a managerial error.”

It is a statement that has sent shockwaves through the conservative movement, pitting compassion for a grieving widow against the cold, hard requirements of running a multimillion-dollar political powerhouse.

---

💔 The Blurring of Grief and Leadership

Owens’ primary argument centers on the swiftness of the transition. Charlie Kirk, the co-founder and face of the organization, was assassinated on September 10th. Days later, his wife, Erika Kirk, was announced as his successor.

For Owens, this was not a moment of honoring a legacy but a crucial corporate mistake.

"She should never become the CEO and chairman overnight," Owens stated, insisting that TPUSA blurred the sensitive line between profound personal grief and major organizational leadership.

Owens suggested that the rapid elevation forced a woman dealing with unimaginable trauma into an immediate public spotlight. She painted a picture of Erika Kirk facing a crushing dilemma: she might be contending with either “the greatest evil that ever happened” (the assassination) or simply “terrified” by the sudden demand to lead.

💼 The 'Trial by Fire' Critique

In the world of corporate and non-profit management, the death of a founder always calls for a planned succession. Owens argued that TPUSA bypassed this fundamental principle, setting Erika Kirk up for failure.

• The Interim Solution: Owens stressed that "any company would do" what TPUSA failed to—install an interim CEO. This would allow the organization to stabilize and, crucially, give Erika Kirk the necessary time to grieve her husband without the immediate pressure of defending the organization.

• The Expectation to be Charlie: Owens noted that by taking the role so quickly, Erika effectively proclaimed herself "equipped to be Charlie." Owens warned that this sets an impossible expectation, subjecting her to the same intense scrutiny and public criticism her husband faced, but without the years of preparation.

• The Loss of Immunity: The quick promotion means Erika is no longer "just a grieving widow," but the final authority. “Now when people have questions, you got to answer them, right?” Owens remarked, highlighting how the organization surrendered the moral shield of grieving family by placing the widow at the helm.

⚔️ The Feud Heats Up: TPUSA vs. Owens

Owens's critique of the CEO appointment is just one piece of a much larger, messy public conflict with TPUSA.

The tension has amplified after Erika Kirk recently appeared on Fox News and delivered an emotional condemnation of the "mind virus" of conspiracy theories swirling around her husband's death. While she didn't name Candace Owens, the target was clear, as Owens has been the most prominent voice suggesting insider and foreign involvement without providing public proof.

Owens hit back swiftly, comparing TPUSA's defense of its internal practices to the backlash she received for critiquing the Black Lives Matter organization:

"It is a positively ABSURD notion that you cannot critique a $150 million organization because the CEO says they are like a family, and are grieving," Owens posted on social media.

The debate has moved far beyond management style; it is a battle for the narrative of Charlie Kirk's legacy and the future direction of the conservative youth movement he built. Was Erika Kirk's appointment a necessary act of defiant continuity, or was it, as Candace Owens claims, a hasty and dangerous "managerial error" that threatens to destabilize TPUSA when it needs stability the most?

---

Is This the Mind of Christ?

The behavior of publicly and harshly critiquing a grieving widow’s appointment to a leadership role, especially amid unproven conspiracy theories about her husband's assassination, appears to run contrary to key Christian principles of mercy, humility, and avoiding public condemnation. Jesus directly instructs believers in Matthew 7:1-2, “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.” This scripture cautions against passing severe judgment, particularly in matters of motive or character, as it is a standard that will be applied back to the speaker. Furthermore, the New Testament repeatedly calls for gentleness and edification in all communication, even when offering correction (Ephesians 4:29). By choosing a highly public, confrontational platform and using language such as "managerial error" and implying a lack of genuine grief, the conduct lacks the compassionate and restorative spirit Christ demands, and instead contributes to division and scandal.

Conversely, a defense of Owens's conduct could be framed under the Christian obligation to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15) and to exercise righteous judgment, especially when addressing perceived failures or corruption within influential public organizations. While the Bible forbids hypocritical or condemnatory judgment, it requires spiritual leaders to discern and speak against financial mismanagement, lack of accountability, or any behavior that harms the wider community. Her actions could be viewed as a courageous, albeit harsh, attempt to protect the mission and integrity of the organization, citing a management decision that, in her view, compromises its future. Ultimately, a biblical assessment rests on the true motivation—whether it stems from humble concern for truth and justice (Christ-like) or from personal rivalry, self-exaltation, and a "critical spirit" that seeks to tear down rather than build up (Galatians 6:1).

What do you think?

Was Candace Owens right to prioritize corporate strategy over compassion, or is her public critique of a grieving widow an unacceptable escalation of the TPUSA feud?