Candace Owens arrived in Moscow on June 1 and will appear Thursday at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum alongside sanctioned Russian officials and propagandists, raising pointed questions about whether the Kremlin is using the conservative podcaster's massive platform to push its messaging directly into American living rooms.
The 37-year-old commentator, who commands six million YouTube subscribers, will share a panel with Anna Kuznetsova, a Russian politician sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury for running a program that kidnapped Ukrainian children and trafficked them to Russia for so-called "re-education", and TV presenter Yuliya Baranovskaya, sanctioned by the European Union for spreading propaganda. The forum's headline speaker is Vladimir Putin himself.
Owens' spokesperson told the New York Post she is not being paid for the trip and is covering all her own expenses, hotels, flights, meals, train tickets, everything. That distinction matters legally. Under heavy U.S. sanctions on Russia, which extend to blocking American credit and debit card transactions in the country, accepting payment for speaking could be deemed illegal under Treasury Department rules.
Owens wasted no time promoting Russia's virtues after landing. She posted on X that "the Christian expression and heritage here is unmatched," called Moscow "beyond family-friendly," and added: "Unsurprisingly, they are lying to us about Russia." She shared photos of herself with her husband, George Farmer, and their four children.
In a second post, she wrote: "I'm starting to understand why the talking heads panic and shout and lie about 'Russian collusion' when they learn an American with a platform is traveling here... It is genuinely shocking how clean, beautiful and ordered this city is. It is so far removed from media depictions."
The posts read like a travel brochure. They do not mention that Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 and remains at war. They do not mention that a Ukrainian drone struck St. Petersburg on Wednesday, disrupting the city's airport and sending plumes of smoke from an offshore oil terminal. They do not mention that independent journalism is effectively criminalized in the country she is praising, or that dissenting views carry severe legal penalties and prison time.
Journalists Evan Gershkovich and Alsu Kurmasheva were sentenced to 16 years and six and a half years in Russian prison on trumped-up charges before being released in a historic prisoner swap in 2024. They are just two of many examples of what happens to voices the Kremlin does not control.
Experts on Russian influence operations say Owens' appearance fits a well-documented pattern. Alex Goldenberg, a Senior Fellow at the Rutgers Miller Center and founder of Silent Index, told the Post plainly what Moscow sees in her:
"The Kremlin courts the people it assesses as useful for widening America's divisions, the specific issue is incidental. They'll stoke whatever fracture is available."
Goldenberg did not mince words about the historical precedent. "Moscow extended the platform and that tells you how they see her, as someone whose reach can be turned into division or political capital," he said. "The Soviets had a term for Western sympathizers like Candace Owens. It translates roughly to useful idiot."
That phrase, "useful idiot", has a long Cold War pedigree. It describes someone who advances a hostile foreign power's interests without fully understanding, or caring, that they are being used. Whether Owens fits that description or simply sees an opportunity for content, the Kremlin's calculation is the same: her audience is the asset.
Sources told the Post that Owens' trip is highly likely to be closely monitored by the FSB, Russia's security service, during her time in the country. That should surprise no one. Russia monitors everyone.
Susan Smith-Peter, a professor of Russian history at the City University of New York, described the broader strategy. Putin has been courting commentators on both the extreme right and extreme left in the United States, she said, naming Owens alongside former White House aide Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson, who interviewed Putin during a 2024 visit to Russia.
"The way to undermine society is to work on the far left and the far right, and the implication is that Russia is at war with the US in the information space since at least 2014. It's a way to undermine a country from within."
That observation deserves attention from conservatives who rightly worry about foreign-aligned behavior among American political figures. The concern is not limited to one side of the aisle. When a foreign adversary extends an invitation, the question is never "why me?", it's "what do they get?"
The St. Petersburg forum, sometimes called "Putin's Davos", draws a guest list that tells its own story. Among the scheduled speakers is Aleksandr Dugin, the far-right political philosopher called "Putin's Rasputin" for his influence on the Russian leader, including his role as a guiding voice in starting the Ukraine war. Dugin is also accused of spreading fierce anti-American and antisemitic views.
Other attendees include Steven Seagal, the U.S.-born former actor who has held Russian citizenship since 2016, and manosphere influencers Andrew and Tristan Tate, who landed in Russia on Wednesday and are rumored to attend, USA Today reported.
Owens' panel is titled "Big Family, Big Reach: New Demographics and Narratives for Media Managers." The stated topic is "solving complex problems" within large families. The real draw, of course, is not parenting tips. It is the reach of the panelists' platforms and the Kremlin's interest in shaping what flows through them.
Matthew Witkin, an investigative researcher with the Anti-Defamation League, connected Owens' Russia visit to her broader pattern of affiliating with fringe figures across borders:
"Owens has a history of reaching across countries and connecting with fringe figures so it's not surprising that she affiliates herself with Russia, especially with Dugin and his conspiracy theories about Jews and the Rothschilds. She has carved out a niche for herself as an amplifier of antisemitic content."
That track record includes being sued over her insistence that French first lady Brigitte Macron was born a man, a claim she offered no credible evidence for, as well as persistent antisemitic rhetoric, including saying Israel is responsible for ritual murders and pedophilia. Her support for Russia dates to at least 2024, when she called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky a "homosexual actor" and said his country would never "triumph over an orthodox Russia."
Russia's most effective interference campaigns against the United States have taken place online, largely through bot armies and trolls controlled by the shadowy Internet Research Agency. Many of those bots are designed to mimic genuine American voices, amplifying divisive content at both ends of the political spectrum to fracture public debate.
That pattern appeared to surface beneath Owens' own posts from Moscow. The New York Post flagged comments from accounts with few followers and little engagement that looked suspiciously like fake bots. One account, "Curtis Haines Jr.," wrote: "Is Russia really our enemy? Genuinely asking... It certainly doesn't seem like it." Another, "Birdman Jon," declared: "Russia has balls. The West does not. When there's breaking news, I only check RT and a few podcasts including Owens."
Whether those accounts are real people or Kremlin-directed fakes, the effect is the same: they amplify exactly the message Moscow wants American audiences to absorb. And Owens' platform provides the delivery system. The pattern of public figures being exposed for conduct that benefits adversaries is not new, but the brazenness of this trip stands out.
Here is where this story should matter most to the right. Conservatives have spent years, correctly, warning about foreign influence in American politics. They have rightly demanded accountability when officials or commentators act in ways that serve hostile powers. The principle does not change when the person holding the microphone calls herself conservative.
Owens is not a government official. She holds no security clearance. She is free to travel where she likes. But freedom to travel is not freedom from scrutiny, and the scrutiny here is earned. She is appearing on a stage built by a government that invaded a sovereign nation, kidnapped children, jailed journalists, and has waged information warfare against the United States for over a decade. Her co-panelist is sanctioned by her own government for child trafficking.
The question is not whether Owens has the right to go. She does. The question is what she is lending her credibility, and her audience, to. Political figures who make unexpected alliances always face that question, and the answer matters more when the alliance is with an adversary state.
Conservatives who care about national security, about the integrity of public discourse, and about holding their own side to the same standards they demand of the left should be asking hard questions about what Owens gains from this trip, and what Putin gains from her.
There is a reason Moscow extended the invitation. The Kremlin does not hand out stage time for free. It is not interested in Owens' family values or her podcast metrics. It is interested in what she will say when she gets home, and who will believe her when she says it.
Accountability is not a left-wing value. It is a conservative one. And when prominent figures are caught in compromising positions, the right should be the first to say so, not the last.
If Owens returns from St. Petersburg repeating Kremlin talking points to six million subscribers, the people who should be angriest are not liberals. They are the conservatives whose credibility she borrows every time she opens her mouth.
