September 9 — "They Are Going To Kill Me"
The single most consequential claim in this section, and the least documented.
The claim
Candace Owens has stated that on September 9, 2025 — the day after the donor group chat and the day before the assassination — Charlie Kirk escalated in communications with three people, saying words to the effect of "I think they're going to kill me." (KM-09)
Other framings of the same day appear in circulating compilations, including the description of a combative meeting during which Kirk reportedly texted others saying "THEY ARE GOING TO KILL ME." (KM-07) Most coverage summarizes it as messages sent roughly 24 hours before his death warning that his life was in danger.
Who says they received or saw it
| Person | What they describe | Channel |
|---|---|---|
| Andrew Kolvet | "They will kill me" (KM-08) | Signal / Telegram |
| Frank Turek | Day-before warning; earlier text and email | Text and email |
| Dan Flood | Kirk feared being "executed tomorrow" (KM-10) | Reported by Owens |
| Harrison Smith | Kirk feared he would be taken out | Public commentary |
| Candace Owens | Displayed texts on her program | Phone display on air |
Each of these accounts has its own page in this section, because the strength of the overall claim depends on whether these are five independent witnesses or one story repeated by five people who talk to each other.
What is missing
No screenshot of the September 9 "kill me" messages has been published. That is the central problem. The September 8 donor texts were released with images and confirmed by TPUSA's spokesman. The September 9 escalation has not been. Owens has said she displayed texts on air; the specific September 9 language has not been shown in any published still that this investigation has been able to locate.
Verification status, stated plainly: corroborated text content exists about donors; the "I think they're going to kill me" (KM-09) content is described rather than shown.
Why it still matters
Multiple named people, several of whom have professional reputations at stake, have said the same thing on the record. That is not nothing. It is the kind of consistent multi-source account that, in an ordinary investigation, would justify a device forensics request — precisely the thing that has not publicly happened. If Kirk's Signal and Telegram histories were preserved and examined, the question would be settled in an afternoon. See Signal and Telegram, Not iMessage for why that distinction is decisive, and Erika Kirk's Denial for the contradicting account.
Open questions
- Who are the three people Owens says received the September 9 messages?
- Have any of Kirk's devices or messaging accounts been forensically preserved?
- Was the "combative meeting" of September 9 documented anywhere, and who attended?
- Why has no participant released a screenshot when the donor texts were released freely?
Interesting In This Area
- Five people describe it, and the question is whether they are five sources or one.
- No screenshot exists, unlike the donor texts released the day before.
- Dan Flood, the head of security, is among the reported recipients.
Interesting In Other Areas
- Recipient-side extraction has never been ordered in the state case.
- Four proposed laws target exactly this class of unpreserved private record.
Other Pages In This Section
A published screenshot in which Dillon reportedly denies that Charlie was bullied or threatened, while confirming that saying certain things would come at a cost. The page separates what the image shows from what the poster says was said off-camera. They are not the same thing.
Read thisTPUSA's spokesman is both a reported recipient of a threat message and the official who authenticated a different set of Charlie's texts on the record. That double role makes him the one person who could settle the dispute and be hard to dismiss. He has not done so publicly, in his own words.
Read thisSignal and Telegram, Not iMessage
One technical detail reconciles the central contradiction: messages sent over Signal and Telegram would not sit on the iPhone anyone later checked. It resolves the denial without calling anyone a liar.
Read thisElsewhere In The Investigation
State of Utah v. Tyler Robinson, case 251403576, is where the government's narrative meets adversarial testing — every court date, the day-by-day preliminary hearing transcripts, and the inconclusive ATF ballistics.
Read this
Four federal laws modeled on the Epstein Files Act, drafted to force disclosure and mandate a real investigation. Every unanswered question in the aftermath is downstream of records nobody can compel today.
Read thisSources
- Candace Owens' public statements and program segments
- Circulating Instagram and X compilations, including @BalochRamzan2 and @Partisangirl
- Master investigation file — "They were going to kill him TOMORROW" section
Best understanding of when he said this
Best understanding: SEPT 9 during/after the combative meeting. Domain SEPT 8–10 with sub-day bars.
Date range (working model): Domain: SEPT 8–10 2025 · 6 bars/day · Combative meeting / day-before texts
The chart below is not a government finding. Bar height is relative likelihood from public claims (X posts, interviews, investigation indexes, master-file notes). Domain is trimmed to where likelihood is non-trivial — no multi-week empty stretch.
Interesting
- A rebuke over Owens and Carlson warned God would lift His hand from Kirk.
- The jet N1098L is reportedly operated by an ISR defense contractor.
- Leadership announcements reportedly began within hours of the shooting.
Related Areas
- Compiled quotes and warnings table
- The security team around Charlie
- Timeline of the days before
- Evidence handling after the shooting
- New laws to force disclosure
- Intelligence services in the case