Document text
Review of Brian Harpole's lawsuit against Candace Owens (Episode 107)
YouTube video by Baron Coleman Clips (@BaronColemanClips) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97tGiojSbEk). OPINION COMMENTARY by Baron Coleman (Baron Coleman Clips (@BaronColemanClips)) — one commentator's contested analysis of the Charlie Kirk assassination and the State v. Tyler Robinson prosecution. These are his own assertions and theories, NOT the court record, NOT established fact, and NOT endorsed by profoundd; some make unverified allegations about named individuals. Archived here, attributed and lane-separated as commentary, so the claims can be weighed against the primary record — the tyler-robinson-trial hearings and filings in this same collection. Inclusion in this archive is not evidence of truth.
where we're going to have to dismiss the case again, ladies and gentlemen. Because we find out that on December 17th of 2025, now apparently fearing a lawsuit, I don't know what that means. That's That's not a pleading. That's not a plain statement of the facts. That's your weird intuition. But this is a fact. Owens reached out to Harpole. Huh. Wow, wonder what she wanted. Oh, asking if he wanted to have an off-the-record discussion. Oh. I wonder what that was all about. If only there was some way we could find out what this off-the-record discussion intended to be about. Harpole did not respond. Well, that's weird. You felt like she defamed you. I think I would want to know questions, but he chose not to respond. Well, I wonder if there was only there WAS A WAY OH, THERE IT IS. WE HAVE A WAY. We can find out right here. We've got the actual Well, let's see, ladies and gentlemen. Let's put on our specs. Let's Let's get to reading, guys. Okay, here we go. We'll read together. You ready? Hi, Brian. Well, that's awfully friendly. That's That's awfully friendly. This is Candace Owens. OH. ME amo Candace. Okay. Got you. Got you. Uh uh A lot of people telling me that you're planting seeds regarding a lawsuit. Oh, okay, interesting. Wanted to see if you wanted to have an off-the-record discussion with me about anything or if you'd like to simply clarify something that I got wrong. Oh. Cuz if you're if you're worried she was defaming you, and that's what serious lawyers do, they bite the end of their No, like Paul Newman. leaning back in his chair, So, you're telling me the woman you're suing I I can almost picture how the examination So, the wo- the woman you're suing, she reached out to you? Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh, inter- She did, huh? Sh- She wanted to know if if you would help her correct the record. Is that Did I hear that correctly? She wanted to know if you wanted to correct the record? What What did you say? What did you say in response? Did you correct the record? Salvage your reputation, sir? Did you Did you tell her where she got the story wrong? What do you What do you mean you didn't respond? You weren't concerned? You weren't concerned that she was defaming you? That must have been the only time she reached out to you. Is that correct, sir? Surely there wasn't another indication of of of her reaching out to you. Obviously, this was a one-time thing, right? Okay, well, let's let's let's read on then further, shall we? Owens then used Harpole's silence to further defame him. Oh. Oh. Well. On the December 19th episode of her podcast, Owens implied Harpole's failure to respond to her text message was suspicious. Well, isn't it? I- Isn't it suspicious? If If you accused me of participating in someone's death, and then you reached out to me to say, "Hey, please Did I Tell me if I got it wrong." And I did not respond. And I was confident you got it. And And I know you got it because I'm I'm There's a cruel irony of the fact that sometimes to repair glasses, you need a tiny screwdriver and a tiny screw, but you can't see either of them because you can't wear your glasses and fix them at the same time. >> [laughter] >> What a cruel world we live in. This is God having a sense of humor. This is proof God's a comedian at heart. Oh, yeah, I'll give you a tiny little screwdriver and a tiny little screw in case your glasses need to be repaired. Oh Oh, yeah, but you're not going to be able to wear your glasses while you're repairing them.Ah, here we go then. In the same podcast, Owens again placed Harpole at Fort Huachuca, characterizing the alleged meeting as a form of planning or coordination related to the assassination of Quake. She stated that she found Snow's narrative to be compelling. She'd been given travel logs for Brian Harpole, and it's highly possible that Harpole could have made it to that meeting. I can tell you definitively, Harpole could have made it to that base for that very early early morning meeting. This is blatantly false. Oh. Oh. Uh Mr. Harpole, what what what is that there on the screen? I I see the beginning of what appears to be some sort of a screen cap. It's got a number at the top. It says 3:44. What What is that number there, Mr. Harpole? Oh, that's a time. What What time of what, sir? The time you received the message. Well, who Who is the text Oh. M- M- MR. HARPOLE, ARE YOU SAYING ON TWO SEPARATE occasions Miss Owens reached out to you to offer you the opportunity to correct the record? And you chose not to respond a second time. Is that what I understand, Mr. Harpole? UH CAN CAN WE READ THE TEXT MESSAGE here together? Uh I'll read it. You tell me, Mr. Harpole, if I get this right here. I just want to make sure I'm reading it correctly. You Look at your copy. Uh Hey, Brian. Uh just again reaching out in case you want to clarify your whereabouts on the morning of September the 9th. Mr. Harpole, uh is this a fair and accurate representation of the text message you received on Friday, December the 19th, at 11:58 a.m.? It is. Do you Do you read the line here where she says she's only interested in the truth? Do you see that line there, Mr. Harpole? It's kind of in the middle of this block of text here. Do you see that there? I'm only interested in the truth. So, would be happy to debunk Mitch if perhaps he's misremembering the faces he saw. Y- YOU YOU GAVE ME a a text message right here, Mr. Harpole. Mr. Harpole. Let me read it again just in case the jury missed it here. Only interested in the truth. Did I read that correctly, Mr. Harpole? She's only interested in the truth. That's what she wrote to you on December 19th at 11:58 a.m. Is that what you Is that Did I read that correctly? Okay, thank you. Uh would be happy to debunk Mitch if perhaps he's misremembering the faces he saw. Mr. Harpole, did I read that line correctly? Mr. Harpole, how did you respond to this text message? Surely, Mr. Harpole, you reached out to her in response to help correct the record. Tell me what you said in response. M- MR. HARPOLE, YOU DID NOT respond to Mr. Harpole. YOUR CASE IS DISMISSED. I AM ALSO THE JUDGE, not just the country lawyer sitting back here. Your case is dismissed, sir. YOU'RE FOOLISH. YOU'RE UNWISE. AND BEFORE WE DISMISS the case, we're going to do a little discovery. So, undismissed. The case is undismissed. We got to look at the TPUSA records first, Mr. Harpole. Then we'll Surely, Mr. Harpole. Surely, that's the only two times she reached out to you for clarification. Don't let me find out she reached out again. I'm going to be a very disappointed counsel/judge. To this day, Owens has still not produced the alleged travel logs she referred to in this episode to give false credibility to the defamatory assertion she was promoting that Harpole had been part of an assassination conspiracy meeting at Fort Huachuca.She's never produced them because she knows they demonstrate that Harpole was in Dallas, Texas, at the time of the Fort Huachuca meeting. In her video, she was teased some comments from her viewers, specifically brought attention to and boosted one comment which expressed support for Snow in his All right. Surely, there's no more text messages. Let's read just one more paragraph, sir, before we have to move on from this subject. Uh Owens soon texted Ha- Harpole a third time. Mis- Mr. Ha- Mr. Harpole. I- These are your lawyers, Mr. Harpole? The Did Did CANDACE DID YOU HIRE CANDACE'S LAWYERS TO DRAFT THE complaint for Candace, Mr. Harpole? to texted you a third time, Mr. Harpole? Asking him again if he'd like to speak about the events that transpired on the morning Well, surely the third time's a charm, Mr. Harpole. I'm eager to hear how you responded. Owens concluded her text message by saying she found it odd she could not get Harpole to confirm or deny his location. I think it's odd. I mean, I'm I'm back to Baron here. I think that's very odd. If someone is actively accusing me of being somewhere and I don't respond to that person when they reach out to me for clarification uh it's almost as if they're admitting they were there I allegedly allegedly in my opinion in my opinion. >> [snorts] >> Owens already knew why Harpole did not respond. Oh? What Why? Her repeated text to Harpole to get him to respond to the defamatory conspiracy theories that she had been promoting present a cynical attempt to profit from the situation she had manufactured. By spreading defamatory lies about Harpole and then cajoling him to give her to give her You guys don't Now, Mr. Harpole, do your lawyers have a grammar textbook in the office somewhere? Do they subscribe to Little Brown's writing help book? Strunk and White? Any of the Texas legal writing manual? Anything that would explain the proper verb form of the word give? Oh. Uh sorry, guys. I I apologize for that. Uh give give her the exclusive content of a response. She stood to profit from an increased attention and viewership to her platform at Harpole's expense. What typically happens in a cease and desist situation or a lawsuit situation or a situation where someone feels defamed? I've received these letters. I'm I think I'm only podcaster that can come on here and announce it when I >> [cough] >> I've received these letters. What typically happens is they want you to give their side of the story. They typically say you've said something that's inaccurate, can you correct it? Here's what actually happened. Candace just didn't wait for the letter. She act proactively reached out and said, "Hey, I I I'd like to clarify No one in their right mind like Candace got a cease and desist letter from TPUSA. Wolves and Finance got a cease and desist letter from TPUSA. Project Constitution got a cease and desist letter from TPUSA. All of them addressed it. All of them mentioned it. Not one time did someone say you know that cease and desist letter only boosted the profits. You know, Project Constitution probably made another 35 cents off that letter. Uh Candace like when man when she mentioned that letter, she probably got literally fives of dollars more than she would have gotten otherwise. No. In fact, that's not the way it works at all. The entire legal structure of defamatory law is if you feel like someone's gotten something wrong, you ask them to go to the platform and give it equal time.In fact, your cease and desist letter did that. You asked her to post something and leave it up for 30 days. You asked her to I mean, you you requested long after she had contacted you But apparently a third time he reaches out. The hell are my glasses? I can't do this without my glass. Oh, here they are. Uh sorry. No, Uh Mr. Harpole, I got one more question here because uh this this this here seems to be yet a third text message that you received Now, we'll read it together here. Uh Hi Brian, I'm reaching out again to see if you'd be willing to speak about the morning of September the 9th. I'm obviously not trying to do anything other than debunk Mitch so I can pivot and refocus the investigation, but I oddly cannot get you to confirm or deny if you were there. Uh Mr. Harpole I- I- Is it Is it fair to say that the construction of the English language in this courtroom today would lead an a reasonable believer a reasonable reader audience member juror to believe that her goal in reaching out to you was to debunk Because those are the words she used, Mr. Harpole. Uh How in the fact, sir, did you respond to this? Did you help her debunk Mitch? Did you provide the travel records that so definitively prove where you were on the 9th, Mr. Mr. Harpole? Did they? Did Did Did surely you provided a bulk of information because you have here a friendly person who you believe may have And she's looking here, Mr. Harpole, according to her words here to debunk Mr. Snow and pivot pivot away from you, sir. She finds it odd she can't get in touch with you. Uh Mr. Harpole, if I'm being honest, I find it odd as well. Uh so odd in fact, Mr. Harpole I'm going to have to I'm going to have to dismiss the case again. Dismissed. The case is dismissed, MR. HARPOLE. GET OUT OF MY COURTROOM, MR. HARPOLE. JUDGE, JURY, EXCUSE OUT, MR. HARPOLE. DON'T YOU EVER COME BACK IN THIS COURTROOM AGAIN, SIR. You've made a disgrace and a mockery of the judicial system. Defamation law may never recover. This is disgusting behavior, soy, Guys, this is nonsense. This is absolute nonsense. I HAVE NEVER IN MY LIFE SEEN a worse I've never seen a defamation lawsuit where they're like yeah, you know, the person who defamed me was desperately trying to get the story right, but I You know what newspaper reporters do? I I made one cry one time. You know what newspaper reporters do when they're going to write a defamatory hit piece? There's a little trick they pull. This is They'll write They'll spend 6 months writing up this story or 6 weeks writing up this story. They all spend day and night, 12 hours a day, this 70 80 hours a week just banging away at the keyboard writing up the worst hit piece on your client the world has ever seen. Defaming them left, right, and And you know what they do in order to protect themselves? And it just gives them basically an automatic shield. They reach out to you. Now, they'll reach out to you like 20 minutes before the story publishes. Usually about an hour. They'll say, "Hey, I'm putting this story up at 4:00. Do you care to provide a response?" And you've got to read the whole story determine whether you want to provide a response and then you have to respond to them. But in doing so, it's like an auto shield. Like no judge in their right mind is going to hold them accountable for defamatory conduct because they reached out to you. And if you put in there that I didn't do it, they're going to print it. They'll print, "This is my investigation.This is what my investigation found. This is what Mr. Harpole said. That's what she was doing. Mr. Harpole You You You cannot refuse to participate in the reporting process and then get mad This is one of the most ludicrous things I've ever seen. And that's what honestly I truly believe they do not want this lawsuit to go forward. The discovery that would come out of this lawsuit would be so devastating. And I mean devastating even if planned and executed Charlie Kirk without the involvement of any other human being on Earth. And everyone at TPUSA and everyone on the security team and everyone Eric Everybody was just caught completely unaware and they were like, "Wow. This discovery [clears throat] would still be disgusting. Nobody, particularly a political operation, wants a months of their text messages, videos, phone calls. They They don't want travel records. They don't want security plans. They don't want Which is why I cannot possibly believe that TPUSA would have wanted him to do this. Now, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe that Maybe this is some and put it all in Brian Harpole's hands Last I heard, Brian Harpole had been fired.