Watch Louder with Crowder every weekday at 11:00 AM Eastern, only on Rumble Premium!

Andrew Wilson debated Candace Owens over who assassinated Charlie Kirk. Here are some of the top moments.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

According to Wilson, “he is not perfect on the case” and was never “going to pretend that I am. But what has been made very clear is that there's nobody with an alternative theory that has any evidence for it at all. None. Zero.”

When Owens was asked if she had any evidence Israel was involved, she said she “likes to probe that narrative because what we've seen after coming from the Israeli government and the Israeli prime minister, denying that he did it,” as well as “the phone call that happened in the Hamptons” and “the almost desperate lies about Charlie shifting opinion on Israel.” She said this is what “led us to believe that there could be an Israeli angle.”

With “full confidence,” Owens confirmed she believes both France and Israel are involved.

Wilson later stated, “There is, however, tons of evidence that a leftist killed Charlie Kirk just as Charlie feared they would. I believe Charlie Kirk and I have the receipts.”

Owens claimed that “The entire preliminary hearing….was based on reliable hearsay.”

“Not all hearsay is admissible and not everything presented was hearsay,” Crowder weighed in.

When Owens was later asked if she actually believed TPUSA or Erika Kirk had something to do with the shooting, she claimed she was not going to get herself into “a legal pickle.”

“Hey, if you're out there saying it's clear Erika or TPUSA did it, guess what? Candace won't say it. So, either she doesn't know, or she's a coward, and you need a better champion. So, all the people out there with YouTube channels, it's done now. Your theories, she won't back up because she says she won't get into an illegal pickle. She doesn't have the courage that you do on your Instagram or YouTube channel with 50,000 subscribers. She won't do it. You need someone better,” Crowder said.

After the debate, Crowder asked Wilson how he thinks the needle will be moved.

“I think it's the beginning of a snowball effect. Now that she's been challenged and had to give an accounting for the evidence and did a very poor job, more of them will feel compelled to do more of these debates. At least I'm hoping so. And I think that that'll create the snowball effect,” Wilson said. “But ultimately, there wasn't a need to push back too much on too many things because she just admitted that she didn't have any evidence for anything.”