US Senator JD Vance has ignited a political firestorm by lending credibility to a bizarre online conspiracy theory involving fellow right-wing commentators Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens.
The controversy erupted when Vance, a Republican senator for Ohio, responded to a post on X (formerly Twitter) that questioned the identity of Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA. The post, which has since been deleted, bizarrely suggested that the real Kirk had "died in 2022" and had been replaced by a body double.
In a move that shocked observers, Senator Vance quote-tweeted the post, adding the cryptic comment, "We are so back." This phrase, internet slang for expressing excitement about a situation, was interpreted as an endorsement of the outlandish claim.
The Owens Connection and Online Uproar
The origins of the theory appear to be linked to commentator Candace Owens. It gained traction within fringe online communities after Owens and Kirk had a very public and bitter falling out earlier this year over their differing stances on the war in Ukraine and other issues.
Vance's amplification of the theory sent shockwaves through political circles. Critics were quick to condemn the senator for using his considerable platform to promote what they called a dangerous and baseless lie.
Kirk's Team Fires Back
The reaction from Charlie Kirk's camp was swift and severe. A spokesperson for Turning Point USA denounced the theory and Vance's engagement with it, stating, "It is utterly deranged that a sitting US Senator would give oxygen to a sick, malicious, and false conspiracy theory like this. Charlie is obviously alive and well."
The spokesperson emphasised the tangible harm such rumours cause, adding, "Spreading lies that someone has died is beyond the pale, even for the toxic discourse of social media."
A Pattern of Provocation
For JD Vance, this incident is not an isolated one. The senator has frequently been accused of engaging with extremist content and conspiracy theories to provoke a reaction and solidify his support among the most online segments of the Republican base.
This strategy, while effective at generating headlines and rallying a specific demographic, draws fierce criticism for contributing to the erosion of factual discourse in American politics. The incident highlights the deepening fractures and increasingly surreal nature of political debates within the US right.
