Candace Owens is an intelligent, talented speaker who is passionate about politics. This is a good thing.

But Owens knows neither history nor humility. This sad reality was again proved on Friday, when Owens made the New Zealand mosque shooting, in which at least 49 innocent worshipers were murdered, all about herself.

LOL! 😂



FACT: I’ve never created any content espousing my views on the 2nd Amendment or Islam.



The Left pretending I inspired a mosque massacre in...New Zealand because I believe black America can do it without government hand outs is the reachiest reach of all reaches!! LOL! https://t.co/4vM1aXleL4 — Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) March 15, 2019

The problem here is not that Owens doesn't seem to realize this story isn't about her but that she immediately chose to make it about her. And from someone who revels in claiming the fiery mantle of moral righteousness, it is striking that Owens thought to offer neither a condolence tweet nor a repudiation of the gunman who referenced her in his manifesto. Instead, we get "LOL" joined to an emoticon.

That's bad enough. But Owens wasn't done. Her succeeding tweets continued with the downward moral spiral.

To be clear:



We played the “Candace is Hitler” game.

We played the “Candace is anti-rape victims” game.



If the media attempts this “Candace inspired a mosque shooting in New Zealand” bit—they better all lawyer the f*ck up.

I will go full Covington Catholic lawsuit.



Try me. — Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) March 15, 2019

Again, however, Owens wasn't yet done. She then suggested her critics should blame her for the sinking of the Titanic in 1912.

While it seems unlikely that Owens was responsible for sinking the famous passenger cruise ship, her implication is clear: Criticizing me over the Christchurch attack is the same as arguing I'm the reincarnation of a North Atlantic iceberg.

But this isn't a joke. Facts matter. Consider that second tweet above, in which Owens threatens to sue anyone who blames her for the mosque attack. Because while it would be absurd actually to blame Owens, her confidence in successful lawsuits is misplaced. The First Amendment Owens otherwise claims to treasure explains why. Constitutional law plainly makes clear that, as a public figure listed in the Christchurch attacker's manifesto, Owens wouldn't be able to prove reckless disregard for the truth in any commentary blaming her for the attack. That's a basic point of law, but Owens doesn't know it.

That unknowing quality speaks to Owens' exigent problem as a political advocate: Her binding of arrogance to absent knowledge. She doesn't know history, she doesn't know the Constitution, and she doesn't know humility. Thus, she doesn't know what she ultimately needs to know in order to persuade others that her views are the right ones.