Fired for Questioning the Narrative
What this page does and does not say. This page records one woman's account of her own firing, in her own words. Aubrey Laitsch says she was terminated by Turning Point USA after questioning the official account of Charlie Kirk's assassination. That is her statement about her own employment, and it is reproduced here in full.
She does not name Erika Kirk anywhere in the video. The headline "ERIKA KIRK FIRED HER" is the framing added by the X account that circulated the clip — an account whose own bio describes it as a "Commentary & satire account" whose content is "opinion, fictional commentary, and satire only." This site does not adopt that framing and makes no claim that Erika Kirk personally made, ordered, or knew of any termination decision.
Turning Point USA has not, as far as this site can find, publicly responded to Laitsch's account. No wrongdoing by any person or organization named here is alleged or established. An employer's decision to end an at-will employment relationship is lawful in itself; what is documented here is what a former employee says the reason was.
2 min 59 sec statement to camera by Aubrey Laitsch, who identifies herself as a former Turning Point USA employee. Circulated by @Parodyjeffx on X, September 1, 2026.
The Clip
On September 1, 2026, a nearly three-minute video was circulated on X in which a woman identified as Aubrey Laitsch, a former Turning Point USA employee, speaks directly to camera about the end of her employment. Within hours the post had roughly 21,000 views, 2,400 likes and 430 reposts.
The posting account captioned it:
"ERIKA KIRK FIRED HER.
Former TPUSA employee Aubrey Laitsch says she was FIRED after questioning Charlie Kirk's assassination.
She says under Erika Kirk's leadership, there's an unwritten rule:
Question the official narrative and YOU'RE GONE."
The caption goes further than the video does. In the clip itself Laitsch refers to "Turning Point" and to "the leadership there." She does not use Erika Kirk's name at any point. Readers comparing the two should treat the headline as the poster's characterisation and the transcript below as the primary record.
What She Says
Laitsch's account has four parts.
1. The stated reason for her termination. She opens by tying the firing directly to her questions about September 10:
"I was terminated from Turning Point because I am questioning the narrative of what happened to my role model and CEO Charlie Kirk on the day of his assassination. What is being told to us in the mainstream media just really doesn't add up to me."
2. That she believes it was a condition of employment. She frames this as her own experience rather than as a written policy:
"It is, from my own experience, that you can't question the narrative and work at Turning Point. That is how I feel, that is how other people I've talked to feel."
3. That Kirk himself modelled the opposite. This is the argument she returns to most:
"It goes against everything that Charlie ever stood for. Charlie was someone who did question things, who did challenge the narrative."
She adds that if any staffer had been killed the way Kirk was, "Charlie would be doing the same thing... He would have never lived it down."
4. That she is not the only one. She says others have been terminated, and offers her own tenure as a measure of what the organisation lost:
"All of these people who have been terminated were the most hard-working, loyal, honest employees that Turning Point has ever had. And I know that because I've actually been at Turning Point longer than most people."
The Turnover Claim — and How to Check It
The one part of Laitsch's account that is externally checkable is her claim about staff turnover. She points readers at public data herself:
"That's public record. You can see it for yourself on these job websites. Turning Point's average length of employment is about a year and a half to 2. And so to be there for almost 5 years is actually quite some time. I've seen the media and marketing team, for example, turn over at least twice, consisting of about 40 people."
Three specific, falsifiable figures sit in that passage:
| Claim | Stated figure | How it could be checked |
|---|---|---|
| TPUSA average tenure | ~1.5 to 2 years | Aggregated tenure data on public employment-listing sites |
| Laitsch's own tenure | ~5 years | Her own public employment history |
| Media/marketing turnover | ~2 full cycles, ~40 people | Comparison of staff listings across years |
(source needed — this site has not independently verified any of the three figures. They are recorded as her claim, with the verification route she herself proposed.)
Why This Matters to the Investigation
Laitsch's account, if accurate, speaks to a narrow but relevant question: how the organisation Kirk founded has treated internal doubt about his death. It does not bear on who fired the shot, and this page should not be read as evidence about the assassination itself.
It does connect to material already documented elsewhere on this site. TPUSA's post-death direction is covered in TPUSA Contradicts Kirk's Legacy, which catalogs reported policy reversals against Kirk's own stated positions. The succession questions are traced in TPUSA Replacement Timeline. The disappearance of Kirk's own back catalogue is documented in Were Charlie's Podcasts Deleted? and Apple Podcasts Removed Charlie. The internal financial review Kirk reportedly ordered days before his death is covered at DOGE Audit.
The obvious counterargument deserves stating plainly: staff at any organisation are let go for many reasons, and a departing employee's account of why is one side of a dispute the employer has not answered. Laitsch's statement is uncorroborated on this site. She names no other terminated employee, produces no document, and TPUSA has offered no public response for this page to weigh against her. It is recorded because she said it publicly, on camera, under her own name.
Full Transcript
Transcribed from the video above. Speaker: Aubrey Laitsch. Duration 2 min 59 sec. Machine transcription; light punctuation only, no words changed.
I was terminated from Turning Point because I am questioning the narrative of what happened to my role model and CEO Charlie Kirk on the day of his assassination. What is being told to us in the mainstream media just really doesn't add up to me. And I'm really hopeful that one day it will, but as it stands right now, it just doesn't. And so I've been here in the background, talking with people, expressing how I truly feel, because as an American citizen, I have the right to my freedom of speech and my freedom of thought, and I have a lot of concerns and a lot of questions about what took place that day and the events leading up to that day.
It is, from my own experience, that you can't question the narrative and work at Turning Point. That is how I feel, that is how other people I've talked to feel. It goes against everything that Charlie ever stood for. Charlie was someone who did question things, who did challenge the narrative, and I know that if anything, anything at all, were to have happened to myself or another employee or any other peer within the Turning Point family, that Charlie would be doing the same thing if we were brutally assassinated in the way that he was. He would have never lived it down. And that is what I'm standing by as well.
I am not going to just idly sit by and hope that the truth comes to light. I'm going to take action. I'm going to ask questions. I'm going to talk to other people, and I refuse to apologize for having my own freedom of thought, which is something that Charlie ingrained in me and so many other young people.
So really the purpose of me coming on here and speaking with you today is to just bring light to the situation of the treatment happening inside the organization. All of these people who have been terminated were the most hard-working, loyal, honest employees that Turning Point has ever had. And I know that because I've actually been at Turning Point longer than most people. You can — that's public record. You can see it for yourself on these job websites. Turning Point's average length of employment is about a year and a half to 2. And so to be there for almost 5 years is actually quite some time. I've seen the media and marketing team, for example, turn over at least twice, consisting of about 40 people. And so I know that these people have been some of the most loyal, hardworking, and honest individuals to ever pass through the organization, because I've been there, done that, and seen it all.
I'm doing this for them. And I'm doing this for my friends who I consider family who are still there, in hopes that they will start to receive better treatment by the leadership there, because nobody deserves to be let go without cause. And frankly, it's a loss for Turning Point. We're all going to be better off because of this, because we have removed ourselves from an environment that was no longer serving us. And in my opinion, no longer serving the Lord, which was Charlie's entire intention.
Open Questions
- Has Turning Point USA responded publicly to Laitsch's account, and if so, what reason did it give for the termination?
- How many other staff departures have occurred since September 10, 2025, and how many of those individuals have made similar statements?
- Do public employment records support the tenure and turnover figures Laitsch cites?
- Did Laitsch raise her concerns internally before her termination, and to whom?
- Is there any written policy, or any document, bearing on discussion of the assassination by staff?
Sources
- @Parodyjeffx on X, September 1, 2026 — the post circulating the video. Note this account's bio describes it as a commentary and satire account.
- Video preserved on IPFS:
QmYrFAzdP53mRNanqT2gugnSegMCMMQXF4EJAxBebmyCZK - Full machine transcript, reproduced above.