THE ASSASSINATION OF CHARLIE KIRK MAY NOT CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY, BUT UNLIKE THE MURDERS OF JFK, MLK AND OTHER POLITICIANS VYING FOR POWER, IT HAS IMPACTED THE WHOLE OF AMERICA, WITH A SINGLE BULLET TO AN AVERAGE SPRUIKER.

WHAT FOLLOWS IS A FEW OF THE COMMENTS/OPINIONS FROM THE GENERAL MEDIA AND SOCIAL MEDIA… WHAT HAS BEEN OMITTED IS WHERE DID THE GUY WHO CLAIMED TO HAVE (THEN DENIED) SHOT KIRK LEARNED HIS SHARPSHOOTER'S SKILLS. AT MOST TIMES, THE MEDIA GOES ON A FLURRY OF CLUES ABOUT THIS OR THAT SHOOTING CLUB OR ARMY, YET THERE HAS BEEN MOSTLY SILENCE ON THE ISSUE.

THIS EXPOSé IS POSTED AS A RECORD OF WHAT PEOPLE HAVE SAID, NOT ABOUT WHAT GUS THINKS. TRYING TO FIND A CARTOON HAS BEEN STRANGE TO SAY THE LEAST, AS SOME GOT CANNED QUICKLY BY PUBLISHERS, INCLUDING SOUTH PARK.

WAS KIRK SHOT BECAUSE HE DISPLEASED NETANYAHU?

WAS KIRK SHOT BECAUSE HE DISPLEASED ZELENSKYY?

WAS KIRK SHOT BECAUSE OF HIS COMMENTS ON LGBTQ+?

THE ANSWER WILL COME EVENTUALLY, WE HOPE… THOUGH WE’RE STILL WAITING FOR THE REAL VERSION OF WHO SHOT JFK, 62 YEARS AGO….

 

=====================

 

Antiwar progressive reporter Ryan Grim posted, on the day after conservative pundit Charlie Kirk was fatally shot, “There are many layers of tragedy to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, first and foremost for him and his distraught family, and then also for our country which only gets ripped further apart.”

Grim added, “But a third layer of tragedy is that Charlie was genuinely grappling with our ironclad support for Israel in a serious way, and now that journey for him has been cut short.”

 

Charlie Kirk Was an Important Antiwar Voice
In the ongoing intra-conservative debate over foreign policy, he championed America First.

Jack Hunter

 

Grim shared these thoughts with a month-old video of Kirk being interviewed by Megyn Kelly, in which they discussed being attacked as anti-Semites for merely questioning Israel’s leadership. “I have less ability sometimes online to criticize the Israeli government without backlash than actual Israelis do,” Kirk observed. “That's really really weird, isn't it?” Both Kirk and Kelly acknowledged they were on Israel’s side, but also said that its government should not be beyond reproach.

 

On other topics, Kirk’s anti-war, America First views were undeniable. Six months ago, Kirk, a vocal opponent of the U.S. sending aid to Ukraine, said of America’s role in that country’s war with Russia, “You have to ask the very simple question: Who benefits from peace and who benefits from war?... The people of Ukraine benefit from peace. The people of America benefit from peace. Humanity benefits from peace.”

“But then who benefits from the war?” he asked. “The military-industrial complex, oligarchs of the ruling class of Ukraine.”

These were not one-off, random foreign policy thoughts from Kirk, who was assassinated on Wednesday. As the nation continues to process this tragedy, many are rightly remembering Charlie Kirk as a champion of free speech who was willing to debate anyone, anywhere, anytime on cultural issues. But Kirk was also a valuable part of the ongoing foreign policy battle between old guard, neoconservative Republicans like Texas Senator Ted Cruz and talk host Mark Levin, and a newer crop of genuine MAGA conservatives, like Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, talk host Tucker Carlson, former Trump advisor Steven Bannon, and others of a genuine America First brand of realism and restraint.

 

Kirk’s popularity on the right rose alongside the Donald Trump phenomenon, part of an antiwar populist conservative movement that the Turning Point USA founder became part of. With the exception of Pat Buchanan at an earlier time, libertarian Republicans like Kentucky Senator Rand Paul and his father, Ron Paul, had been the most vocal non-interventionists on the right prior to Trump’s election in 2016. Kirk was friends with Paul and had long had a certain libertarian bent. In May, when many Republicans supported legislation to punish critics of Israel, Kirk was strongly against it.

He also opposed a U.S. attack on Iran. As the journalist Glenn Greenwald noted, “Charlie Kirk opposed this pro-Israel censorship bill. Kirk has also been simultaneously denouncing any US attack on Iran both publicly and inside the administration.”

Indeed. Kirk said to his audience in June, “Is a nuclear weapon against Iran a threat to America? Probably could be a threat to Israel, but is it a threat to America? I mean, India has nuclear weapons. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. So is it worth, is it worth a potential, another war with Iran?”

 

“And the people that are, let's just say, advocates for preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons by all means necessary, they're the same architects that were perfectly fine with the Iraq war,” he noted. “The primary way Iran can hurt this country is by sucking us into another Middle East quagmire, and they know it. And Iran would have the potential to be the worst Middle East quagmire of all time. Iran has 90 million people.”

“That's more than three times as big as Iraq was when we invaded 22 years ago,” Kirk added. “It's larger than both Afghanistan and Iraq combined, both in population and in area.”

These are classic non-interventionist arguments for avoiding a U.S. war with Iran, echoes of the Paul family, Carlson, and more.

 

Of course, Kirk was no perfect non-interventionist. But that’s not the point.

The point is that Kirk often did spread antiwar ideas to people who otherwise would not have heard them. The young pundit was popular not only among teenage and twentysomething conservatives, but also their Republican parents, who may have once voted for George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney but would catch Kirk in a Facebook video opposing regime change wars, sometimes in bold terms. Kirk said in June, “My whole life, I've been told that Iran is getting a bomb. Iran is getting a bomb. Iran is getting a bomb. Iran is getting a nuclear bomb. And yet here in 2025, they do not have a nuclear bomb. So why should we trust the American intelligence without verifying it?”

These were the kinds of questions Kirk seemed to be asking more and more in the days and months before his death. Many critics of Kirk believe that since he presented himself as an ally of Israel that he was no different from a neoconservative like Shapiro. They are missing a lot. Regarding Ukraine, Iran, and U.S. foreign policy broadly, Kirk’s stances were generally anti-interventionist and located within an America First context.

There is a rightwing antiwar universe that exists within MAGA that wasn’t as broad or cemented within the Republican Party before Donald Trump became president. As one of the youngest players within that universe, Kirk used his debate skills to nudge the American right away from war and militarism in a way that shouldn’t go unnoticed.

Charlie Kirk lived a remarkable life and did many remarkable things.

Championing peace often was one of them. May he now rest.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/charlie-kirk-was-an-important-antiwar-voice/

 

======================

 

'We knew the family': Utah town in disbelief after local resident accused of killing Charlie Kirk

BY Kayla Epstein/BBC

 

Washington, Utah, located just south-west of Zion National Park, is surrounded by cinematic, flat-topped mountains and has long been a hub for exploring the natural wonders of the American west.

Yet, the last 48 hours have left residents wondering how the portal to the most beautiful parts of the country may have produced one of its ugliest acts of political violence in years.

Tyler Robinson, the man authorities accused of killing the conservative activist Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University this week, resided in the area, according to police. He is now in custody after his father apparently persuaded him to surrender.

Local and federal law enforcement officers descended on typically quiet blocks in Washington and nearby St George, banging on doors and closing off streets as they carried out a high-stakes investigation.

Outside the Robinson family home in Washington, neighbours expressed shock that a fellow resident could have committed such an attack.

• Charlie Kirk memorial service set to take place in Arizona stadium
• Charlie Kirk shooting throws Utah students into heart of US political divide

• Who is Tyler Robinson, the suspect in custody for shooting Charlie Kirk?

• How a college dropout from the suburbs became Maga star Charlie Kirk

"It shakes up a community because you don't expect it," said Addi Jacobson, 20, who recently moved into her grandmother's house in the neighbourhood.

Ms Jacobson said she did not personally know the Robinson family, but her grandmother did.

"She just was saying that she thinks that, from what she's seen and what she knows, they're a great family, just regular citizens," Ms Jacobson said. "She used the words, 'very patriotic people'."

"We knew their family. Our whole neighbourhood is so close," said another neighbour who lives around the corner. She asked the BBC not use her name due to the heated political and online discussion around Mr Kirk's murder.

The woman recalled Tyler Robinson "was a pretty quiet kid", though his younger brothers were more involved in community activities and sports. She called his mother "an amazing parent" and his father "a hard worker". Both occasionally attended a nearby Mormon church, she said.

"That just even goes to show, you can be an amazing parent, and your kid still just chooses what they choose," said the neighbour.

"This is a good family," Utah Governor Spencer Cox told CNN on Saturday. "A normal childhood. All of those things that, that you would hope would never lead to something like this. And sadly, it did."

On 10 September, Charlie Kirk was shot in front of hundreds of students and observers, and later pronounced dead at the hospital. Videos of the carnage spread across social media, and President Donald Trump, Vice-President JD Vance, and leaders of both major US political parties condemned the assassination.

"If you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before, you have no idea. You have no idea what you just have unleashed across this entire country," the activist's wife, Erika Kirk, said in her first public statement on Friday evening.

The night before Mr Robinson's arrest, police vehicles descended on a townhouse complex in St George - about 10 minutes from Washington - where local media reported the suspect had an apartment.

Sherri Steele, who lives across the street from the residence, came back from an evening walk to see a large police presence. In a video she showed the BBC, a loud voice, which she said belonged to authorities, can be heard shouting, "Freeze!" and "Come out now!"

"It just kind of blows your mind, coming up the street and all the sudden there are helicopters above your house," Ms Steele said, adding she had never spoken to Mr Robinson.

Another neighbour, 18-year-old Josh Kemp, said he had seen Mr Robinson leaving his house, on one occasion with a roommate.

According to Mr Robinson's affidavit, police interviewed a roommate who showed them messages the suspect had allegedly posted on Discord.

The messages discussed a "need to retrieve a rifle from a drop point, leaving the rifle in a bush, messages related to visually watching the area where a rifle was left, and a message referring to having left the rifle wrapped in a towel".

"The messages also refer to engraving bullets, and a mention of a scope and the rifle being unique," according to the document. 

Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray plans to file formal charges against Mr Robinson on Tuesday, CBS News reported, when the accused will have his first court appearance.

The nation - including the current occupants of the White House in Washington, DC - will be watching.

But Washington, Utah, will, too.

"This whole time, I never knew that I was living next to somebody capable of something like this," Ms Jacobson said as she played in the park with her fiancé and baby. 

"It just makes you kind of question 'how much closer am I to somebody else that could be this way?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czew1nz17rro

 

====================

 

by Miles Mathis

First published September 11, 2025     Just my opinion as usual based on free internet research anyone could do

[Within two hours this paper went to the front page at Yandex on a search for Charlie Kirk Murder Staged.  Google is of course censoring it.] 

Note the date, to begin with.  The alleged murder was 9/10/2025, which is the same as a matter of numerology as 9/11, both being ones and nines.  Why not ones and eights this time?  I don’t know.  I guess they felt they had overused that. 

How am I one of very few saying this was staged?  It should be the default assumption of any current event.  [Actually, Alex Jones admitted in his broadcast today that many on the ground in Utah said the murder looked staged, even while he was selling the event as real.  Kinda weird.  It’s not really advisable to say the event was staged while you are selling it as real, though it does help me here.] 

The Intel agencies took over the media decades ago.  All media had been managed from the founding of the country, see my paper on Ben Franklin, but after Watergate the CIA took over all media completely in what has been called Operation Mockingbird.  They now manufacture all the news everyday, including multiple major tragedies each week, as part of Operation Chaos.  Not a conspiracy theory, they admit it, see Wikipedia, which has a page on it and Operation Cointelpro, which merged in the 1960s.  They pretend these operations and projects ended at some point, but of course they didn’t, they just expanded and accelerated.  Just look around you: do you really believe Operation Chaos ended? 

This current event screams fake from every pore.  We will start with Kirk’s bio, which I guess few people know.  He came out of nowhere at age 18 to found Turning Point USA, TPUSA, which I have always called Toilet Paper USA.  As such he was just a front for Foster Friess and Bill Montgomery

(the top Montgomerys being Stuarts by another name).  No one but agents founds big organizations like this at age 18.  It takes huge money and promotion, so you should have been suspicious from the start.  Billionaires like Friess do not start organizations to help you, they start organizations to help themselves, so always remember that.  And good guys do not go to work for billionaires at age 18, with zero qualifications.  Once again, if you bought any of this it is because you forgot to ask any questions. You just trusted these completely untrustworthy people.  When are you going to stop doing that? 

Foster Friess was an Army Intelligence officer, multi-billionaire banker/money manager, and cryptoJew, so our work is already done. 

Yeah, he tried to sell himself as a cowboy, though he was from Wisconsin, a Chi Phi fratboy.  He admitted he moved to Jackson Hole to avoid income taxes.  Charming.  He was groomed by the Brittinghams in Delaware to be an investment banker—the opposite of a cowboy—the Brittinghams being billionaires from lumber in Wisconsin.  Wikipedia has scrubbed them completely, but Thomas Brittingham was once the richest man in that area.  The family later got into banking and other forms of theft, as such people do.  Friess was not a Christian crusader, he just used the issue to cloak the fact he was a crusading fascist.  One of the most memorable things Friess did is help block the recall of governor Scott Walker. You remember him, right?  The guy who obliterated the unions in Wisconsin and trashed the economy for his raiding backers like Friess, then stole the recall election. David Koch was another billionaire creep behind Walker.  

You will say Friess was a supporter of Christian causes, so I send you first here, Jewscope, which repeats that mainstream talking point—that Friess was Christian—but then publishes a poll, kind of like the ones you see on sites asking if you think a certain celebrity is gay.  The poll is, do you think Foster Friess is Jewish?  As you see, over 88% said they thought he was.  Why would they think that when every online source says he isn’t, and when he gave money to all these Christian causes?  Well, maybe because people aren’t as stupid and gullible as you are led to believe by reading the mainstream press.  Plus, Friess is a Jewish name, so it isn’t that difficult.  Plus, he was a billionaire banker/money manager, so again, it isn’t that difficult.  Plus, he was heavily promoted, as a great philanthropist and humanitarian, when he was just the opposite, so it isn’t that difficult. 

You will ask me, “But he did give money to these causes, as you admit, so why would he do that if he weren’t a Christian?”  Well, because those causes aren’t really Christian, either, they just pose as Christian.  We have seen it thousands of times, as these people infiltrate Christian organizations and turn them to crud on purpose.  I call it blackwashing.  They have even done it to the Vatican, infiltrating it many times with their own agents, even as high as the Pope himself.  See the Medici Popes, who were Jewish, or see the current Pope.  The Jesuits are also Jewish, and Disraeli and other Jews have admitted it in print.  In the US they have mainly infiltrated Protestant denominations, since that is the majority here. They built Protestantism from the ground up back in the time of Luther, to purposely explode Christianity.  They infiltrate and create schism on purpose, which is the point of the current event as well.  They are trying to start a civil war between red and blue, left and right, to take pressure off themselves.  From their standpoint, a civil war is much preferable to a revolution, since in a revolution they would be the targets, while in a civil war they can keep you targeting one another.  It’s very simple, as you see.

But back to the name Friess being Jewish.  See for example Constance Friess Holman, of the wealthy

New York Friess clan.  She was the personal physician of Georgia O’Keeffe, Jewish, and her brother

Horace married the daughter of Felix Adler, Jewish.  Constance was put through medical school by

Adolph Ochs, the Jewish publisher of the New York Times.  Friess is a variant of the more common Fries, so also search on that surname, where everyone is Jewish or crypto-Jewish.  For example billionaire industrialist Francis Henry Fries, whose family came from Saxony as part of the Moravian Church.  We have hit that many times.  See Jan Hus, etc.  Also see the DeVries family from Holland, big in the Dutch East/West India Company.  Fries/Friess is a variant of DeVries.  All Jewish.

I would assume Charlie Kirk is also Jewish, since Wikipedia conspicuously fails to name his parents. We are told his father is an architect, but I would assume he has Intel connections in the family. Radaris returns no results for a Charles/Charlie James Kirk of Chicago or Illinois, age 31, telling me the name may be a fake.  Maybe he chose this alias in honor of James T. Kirk, Starship Enterprise. 

Instantcheckmate returns no results for Charles/Charlie J. Kirk of Arizona or Chicago, but it does return a result for a Charles Kirk, 31, with locations in Floyd’s Knob, IN, and Lakeside, MI, as well as Chicago.  Three matches there, with the name, age, and location, though this still may not be the right guy. But if this is not him (and it now appears it is not), the big computer has never heard of him, something we have found with many other famous people, including Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. 

 StanleyMoravians,

This Charles Kirk, 31, of Chicago links us to a James Aughenbaugh.  He is aka James Kirk, 66, so the right age to be Charlie’s father or uncle.  But even if he is not, we may learn something about Kirks in that area.  So I think I will keep going anyway.  Think of this as general genealogy research.  I am not accusing these people of anything regardless, except being Kirks of that area, and that is not a crime.  I am not linking them to the event, or non-event.  So no defaming is going on here.  Anyway, these Aughenbaughs come from Massapequa, NY, and James links us to Norma Aughenbaugh, 73 or 79, also of Phoenix, MD.  Why doesn’t that surprise me?  She has a LinkedIN page, so isn’t dead, but we do link her through Winter Park, FL, to former Air Force Staff Sergeant George Aughenbaugh, who has a Findagrave page.  He links us to Hartmans and Hildebrands, also so that may be one of the links to Foster Friess.  As you see, we did learn something.  A search on the name Aughenbaugh finds it is indeed Jewish, see for example Charlie Aughenbaugh at LinkedIN, a driver for Jewish Family Services.  Also see the Aughenbaugh page at Wikitree,filled with Jewish names.

Distractify tells us Charlie’s parents are Robert K. Kirk and Kimberly Ann Kirk, so again, why don’t they come up on his relatives list at Instantcheckmate, Intelius, Truthfinder or Radaris?  I guess that is why they are called Distractify.  Instantcheckmate pulls up no one named Robert K. Kirk from Chicago related to a Charles/Charlie.  Finally, we do find a Robert Kelly Kirk, 53 and 76, related to a Kimberly Kirk in Dayton and Blacklick, Ohio, but no Charles/Charlie is on his list.   None of the other Kirks on Charlie’s list above are on this list, either, so again, this may not be the right family, but I am going to pursue it because it tells us about the Kirks in the region, and because it is all the computers are giving me.  Again, I am not accusing these people of anything, I am just trying to get a feel for the Kirk family in that part of the country.

[Added September 13: A reader has found a listing stating thatCharlie’s parents are actually Robert W. Kirk and Kathryn Kirk, contradicting Distractify, but I am skeptical because you have to ask why that didn’t come up for me, and why it arrived after my paper came out.  There is conflicting information, regardless, and we don’t know who to believe.  However, one thing remains the same: these new Kirks are also Jewish, related to Rosenbachs and Levys, so it proves my point either way. That is what this what this section was all about.

This reader also linked Kirk to prominent Smiths, though there are a lot of Smiths and someone else will have to do the full research: I am not interested.  However, this could link him to Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel.  Could also link him to Joseph Smith of LDS.  Could also link him back to the Titanic fraud and the Smith bankers of Nottingham we have seen many times, like Abel Smith.  That would link him to the King of England.

One thing interesting there that my reader didn’t see.  If Charlie’s mother is that Kathryn Kirk, then his maternal grandmother was Patricia Smith, nee Dankowski.  Making Charlie’s aunt a Simowitz, and other relatives a Nall, Kolarich, Mockler, Gorski, and Reznicek. But the thriller is that in lieu of flowers, they request you make a donation to the . . . are you ready. . . Susan G. Komen Foundation. Komen=Komnene.  See my paper on the Cummings clan if you don’t know what I am talking about.]   

related to AngelKisor and she is finally related to a Charles Kirk

So let’s collate some of these new Kirks in Robert Kelly Kirk’s family.  We find Alexandria Kirk, 25, . That’s same as Kiser/Kizer/Kaiser, and is Jewish.  We find Angelica Kirk, 51, .  So let’s search on Charles Kirk of Ohio instead of Illinois. Nope, still no one 31 or close.  The only other location Angelica has is Missouri, so let’s try that. Again, no luck.  Taking this new info back to Radaris still doesn’t get us anywhere, either.  The computer suggests Alexander Charles Kirk of Ogden, UT, but he is again related to the wrong people. So the runaround continues.  It shouldn’t be this hard.

One thing we got out of that is that the Kimberly Kirk related to these people is 52 and from Ohio, with no locations in or near Chicago.  Her middle initial is K, not A, and she has also lived in Yucca Valley, CA, and Brunswick, ME.  So although she is the right age, she doesn’t quite fit the profile.  Which leads us to ask who was Charlie living with in highschool?  Neither of his parents seem to be from Chicago. 

To double-check that, now let’s do a search on Kimberly Kirk of Chicago.  Charlie allegedly went to highschool in Chicago (Wheeling), so he must have been living with one of his parents.  Again, nothing at Radaris, which is curious.  They are usually the most trustworthy, since they seem the least edited by Intel.  We find a Kimberly Kirk listed twice at Instantcheckmate, from Grayslake, IL, ages 61 or 63, the second one related to Hellers.   See below, where we find Charlie’s wife Erika Frantzve is also related to Hellers.  So again, we did find something.  But neither Kimberly Kirk of Chicago has a Robert or a Charles/Charlie on her list.  The only Kim Kirk who has a Robert on her list in Chicago is 74, too old to be Charlie’s mother.  So if Charlie is a Kirk at all, my guess is Charlie’s mother is related to Hellers, and I am about to remind you why they would wish to scrub it, if you don’t already know.

Charlie Kirk’s alleged wife, Erika Lane Kirk, is née Frantzve, which name is commonly Jewish, though they sell her as originally Catholic, now Calvary.  Also no mention of her parents on her Wiki page, which is a red flag.  You may have noticed that Erika is not on Charlie’s Instantcheckmate page.  Why not?  His first relative should be his wife.  Let’s see what Intelius has to say about it.  Also no link to an Erika Kirk or Frantzve (though we have since come to believe that isn’t our Charlie Kirk anyway). 

Prepare yourself for the next thing.  Erika has a listing at Radaris, where she is related to Charlynn Frantzve, who is related to . . . Brittany Heller, age 34, of Longview, WA.  I remind you that Hitler was really a Hiller/Heller, and that the name is known to be Jewish, a variation of Hildesheim.  You will say I am way out on a limb, so let’s look more closely at Brittany’s Radaris page.  This is public information, BTW, so I am not doxxing anyone or doing anything illegal.  I am not accusing her of anything, just gathering the given information on the web. 

Wow.  Collate those surnames: Hoeppner, Waisner, Kellam, and . . . Braun.  As in Eva Braun.  All those people are just two steps away from Erika Kirk.   All likely Jewish, and of course Braun points us at the Heller/Hiller/Hitler connection again. The odds are astronomically against that being a coincidence.  Through the Hoeppners, we link to the Lyons.  I remind you that the King of England is a Bowes-Lyon.  These Brauns also link us to Winter Park, FL, which I remind you already came up in the paper through the Aughenbaughs, indicating Charlie may have married a Jewish cousin.  That would be par for the course.

So, to sum up on the people search, Charlie Kirk has been pretty well scrubbed by someone, not appearing as we would expect from his mainstream bios.  But we did learn some things, as I told you we might.  Finding Charlie’s wife related to Hellers, and finding a Kimberly Kirk of Chicago also related to Hellers, is a gem even if that Kim Kirk isn’t his mother.  It is so unlikely as a matter of odds, it must be telling us something.  And as you are about to find out, the collation of names I took from that genealogy dive will turn out to bear fruit below, when we look at the alleged murderer.

Which brings us back to the lovely photo under title.  I have let it steep in your brain for a while.

It is tagged as a photo from their wedding.  At first I thought they got married in a construction site, but then I looked closer.  That’s Jerusalem in the background, isn’t it?  Strange place for people who aren’t Jewish to get married.  You will say they are just that religious, but other explanations come to mind. 

Next I found that one, with the subtext “Charlie Kirk and his wife begin keeping the Sabbath”.  Do

Christians keep the Sabbath, or Jews?  We are told the Kirks are involved with Calvary Chapel.  Are they 7th day adventists?  Not according to the search engines. 

Then we come to Kirk being a buddy of Trump, who has had two staged assassination attempts already.  Trump, who just declared a national day of mourning and a week of flags at half-mast in honor of Kirk.  Really?  For Charlie Kirk?  That’s like flags at half-mast for Grover.  I remind you, even if you liked Kirk, he was not Einstein or Mother Teresa.  He was a 31-year-old kid who was a podcaster and never did anything memorable other than yap, like thousands of other self-appointed pundits.  He had no education and was not even self-educated, just reading straight from scripts or teleprompters.  So flags at half-mast for this guy makes no sense.  It reminds us of governors like Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan ordering flags at half mast for the fake victims in Allen, TX, in 2023.

It’s just raw propaganda.   Flags were already at half mast yesterday in Wisconsin, due to governor Tony Evers ordering it to honor the bones of Leon Karwacki, a WWII casualty whose remains were allegedly just returned to the States.  Military propaganda and emotionalism.  Governor Roy Cooper of North Carolina ordered flags at half-mast in 2020 for the fake death of George Floyd.  Flags at halfmast used to be reserved for dead Presidents, House Speakers, and people like that, but they now do it every time someone’s goldfish dies . . . or fakes his death. 

Also strange that Kirk was flown out on AirForce2.  Was he really that important and connected? How?  I don’t understand how a 31-year-old talking head merited this kind of response. 

Next we come to the video, which is as fishy as everything else.  To start with, it is a snuff film, so why are these things being released same day?  That used to be forbidden.  Shouldn’t the family be notified before the world watches a quart of blood squirt from his neck?  It is CGI, but still.  You should be very suspicious.  Do you want your kids watching this?  What is stopping them?  You shouldn’t be watching it, either, since it is traumatizing, but of course that is the whole point.  It is the visible acceleration of Operation Chaos, and the CIA/DHS or whoever has decided that is the way it is going to be from now on.  Your remaining sensibilities are going to be obliterated by a constant stream of CGI snuff films, as all your fake heroes have their heads explode.  If you choose not to click on them, they will come to your house personally and project them on your walls and ceilings. 

Even so, the films aren’t convincing at all.  As with the 911 fake films, the filmer pans away to the crowd or to his shoe tops when no real person would do that.  Why?  Because they don’t want you looking too closely at all this.  They want to whack you hard in the face and then pan away before you can figure out it is fake.  They have obviously planted a bunch of agents in the crowd with cellphones, to make you think this is citizen footage collected from some college students who just happened to be filming, but they are conveniently too far away and of too low quality to confirm or nonconfirm, like films of Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster.  That said, I would say the films nonconfirm, since Kirk’s face looks distorted after the hit and a person shot like that wouldn’t just slouch to the left in his chair, he would collapse like a deer shot in the neck, falling out of the chair hard immediately.  But of course Kirk didn’t want to hurt himself in this acting, so they had to cut away.  The bullet also had to pass through without obstruction from the neckbones to get a squirt like that, so we should see more damage to people or backdrops to the right of Kirk.  We don’t.  There is also AI/CGI residue on the films, with strange dots moving across his chest and Kirk’s ring switching fingers. 

But possibly the most damning evidence is the video at X of agents behind Kirk, which wasn’t age restricted yesterday but is now.  Funny, Kirk having a quart of blood squirt from his neck isn’t age restricted, but clear evidence it was faked now is.   In case you can’t sign in there, I will tell you what it is.  It is a couple of big CIA-looking dudes with earpieces directly behind Kirk on stage, making a series of elaborate arm and hand signs just before the shot.  You know the signs that coaches give to baseball players from the dugout, like “bunt”?  Very much like that.  One guy pulls on his ear and slides his hand across his cap.  The other makes very large gestures with his arms, which are obviously a “go” signal.  If it gets memoryholed I have instructed one of my readers to save it, which he has. 

Today we are getting lots of indication the crowd was planted, since they were chanting “kill Kirk”, and things like that.  Kirk just happened to be answering a question about shooting when he was shot. Alex Jones has admitted it, though he is spinning it as Kirk being killed by the deep state.  It is far more logical to read it as what it was, staged.  Not as in staged without the knowledge of Kirk, but as in staged WITH the knowledge and participation of Kirk, who faked his death to go deeper into Intelligence.  They also planted people to cheer afterwards, to make “liberals” look bad.  Remember, this took place in Orem, Utah, a very spooky place.  This Utah Valley University started out as an offshoot of Brigham Young in Provo, but later moved to Orem.  It didn’t become a university until 2008.  It grew like wildfire and now has about 46,00 students, the largest in Utah.  As with other universities, the CIA has been very busy there.  UVU’s theater program partners with Sundance, a big red flag.  It is heavily promoted by the Kennedy Center, ditto. 

Orem and UVU are heavily Mormon, I remind you, and the Mormons are philosemitic, meaning they like Jews.  Why?  Because LDS was founded by crypto-Jews.  Joseph’s Smith’s mother was Lucy Mack, and the Macks were and are Jews.  They still run Las Vegas, as we saw here.  So it is no coincidence this event was run in Orem.  If you will remember, the Robbie Parker from the Sandy Hook event was also from Orem, UT.  Also not a coincidence. 

You also wouldn’t expect Kirk to be sniped with a 30.06 from 200 yards on a rooftop.  In the remote event this had been real, you would expect some nut in the crowed with a pistol.  As with Trump’s fake assassination, apparently the shooter was visible to some in the crowd, who pointed at him and cried out, again indicating staging, since it would mean Kirk’s security was blind and deaf. 

They are now claiming to have found the gun and extra ammo, “engraved with transgender and antifascist ideology”, which the shooter ditched.  That would never happen.  A sniper savvy enough to take out Kirk with one shot would not ditch the gun and leave clues all over it.  It would be so easy not to. Haven’t you seen Leon: the Professional?  C’mon!  Plus, the engraving BS is right out of Langley or Hollywood.  We saw the same thing in the recent Minnesota shooting, but nobody does that.  This is scriptwriters with too much time on their hands.  They must be charging by the hour.  He also left fingerprints or palm prints, which is not believable.  He had never heard of gloves?  Why not just leave a forwarding address?  You know they will find the guy and the story will go even more off the rails. I don’t know why they bother. 

Kirk’s wife Erika posted some strange comments the day before in social media, that now seem prescient.  This is also par for the course, since the Phoenicians love to telegraph their events to eff with you further. 

To continue the hilarity, “conservative podcaster” Patrick Bet-David said in a Fox interview that if a figure on the left is killed in the next week, it will be indication a foreign nation was trying to start a civil war in the US.  Yeah, right.  A foreign nation, not the CIA or DHS.  And of course Bet-David is Jewish.  Why does anyone listen to these people?  Or do they?   Remember, just because these people are promoted on TV and Youtube doesn’t mean anyone watches them or believes them.  Their numbers are fake and you don’t have to be popular to be hired by Fox or any other channel.   They want you to believe these people are important and that your neighbors are following them, but I don’t buy it.  It is all the usual smokescreen.  They are trying to spark a civil war, but you don’t have to play along.  If they start a war, don’t show up for it.  Don’t believe anything these people tell you, about anything.  It isn’t time for a civil war against your neighbors, it is time for a revolution against these hoaxers and thieves.      

Friday: Yep, they already caught the guy, Tyler Robinson, and he allegedly went online after the event and left “chilling messages”.  Makes sense, right?  If you are #1 on the most-wanted list, on run from the law, the first thing you want to do is get on a computer and start yakking.  I did a search and the first thing that came up was this “who is Robinson” article at th e D aily Mail.  Guess who the writer is?  Go on, you only need one guess.  Shawn Cohen.  As I say, you could win bets going in.

Robinson was caught by his own father, to whom he had just confessed.  They have released video of Robinson leaving the scene, with an American flag and eagle on his black longsleeved shirt.  Also wearing a cap and sunglasses.  I guess this genius hadn’t heard of a balaclava and not wearing clothes with distinguishing logos.  We are told where his mother works, but are told his father Matt Robinson of Washington, UT, “works construction”.  That’s pretty vague, isn’t it.  Can’t research that, can we? No, but we can do a people search on Matt Robinson.  We seem to locate him immediately, but he isn’t related to his wife Amber and he isn’t on her list either.  Tyler isn’t on her list.  Even weirder is that Amber comes up on the search for Matt, as if it is another name for him:

The computer thinks Amber Robinson IS Matthew Robinson. That’s odd.  Have they published a picture of the father yet?  Notice that Amber is the same age, 48, as the Matt Robinson in Beaver.  The jokes write themselves.  Also notice that Amber has locations in Delaware as well as Utah, indicating outside influence here.  We saw above that Foster Friess got his start with the Brittinghams in Delaware. Also notice that all three Matts seem to be the same person, despite having three different ages.  They all have Saint George and Washington on their locations.  Radaris lists the one that is 48 as Matthew C. instead of Matthew Noal, and does not place him in Beaver, making the mystery even larger.  And the name is normally Noel, not Noal. 

So let’s keep trying to unwind this.  Radaris tells us that Amber Dawn Robinson is 44, not 48, and does link her to Matthew Robinson.  But Instantcheckmate does not confirm that, having no Amber Robinson of that age or related to Matthew.  Intelius also does not confirm that.  Even Truthfinder, which links out from that very page at Radaris, does not confirm it, with all Amber Robinsons being 48 not 44 and none being linked to Matthew.  You click on the listing at Radaris which says “view all details” for Amber Robinson, 44, but are taken to the Amber Robinson, 48, we saw above.  Intelius, Instantcheckmate, and Truthfinder all seem to come from the same place now, since they are identical and have the same form and page format.  So the CIA scrubbers seem to be moving slowly this week.*

Radaris tells us this Matt C. Robinson, 48, is aka Matt C. Devooght.  Why would he need an alias, as a construction worker? 

Amber has Thomas Robinson on her list four times, but he has been scrubbed from the other listings, so he might be important.  So let’s look him up.  Yep, one of these four of Saint George, deceased, is related to Kisers of Kansas City, MO, and Leavenworth.  Do you remember where we saw them above?  The Charles Kirk we were looking at there has a sister Alexandria who is related to Angel/Angela Kisor/Bridges, 48, of Ironton, OH, and Tallahassee, FL. That’s according to Truthfinder. Unfortunately, this Angel Kisor also has multiple conflicting listings, and Radaris has no record of her in Ironton, though it links to Truthfinder.  Instead, the best result they return is Angel Kisor, aka Kiser/Kaiser and Prater, 52, of Hamden and Wellston, OH, and she is also related to Prater, Rhodes, and Staley/Stanley.  That fits here, doesn’t it?   Both the Kisers and Kirks are from the area of Ohio south of Columbus. 

To be clear, I am not accusing any of these Angel Kisors of anything, I am just linking the name Kiser/Kisor in the two spots, showing the name matches.  What this means of course is that I have found a possible link between the shooter and victim.  This Tyler Robinson looks like a possible cousin of Charlie Kirk, which of course would blow the cover of the whole thing by itself. 

Clicking on that Robinson Kiser, 47, takes us to this at Radaris:

aka Robinson Melissa Kiser, Todd Robinson Kiser, Rt Kiser, Robersen T Kiser, Kiser T Robinson, Todd Kisser Robinson

He is definitely a Kiser, since his relatives are four Kisers.  Radaris says he has a LinkedIN page under Robinson Kiser, so let’s go there.  They have no listing for him in Kansas City, but they do have a Robinson K. that the computer seems to think is him, a dentist in Leavenworth.  So it looks like he may have scrubbed his listing recently, possibly due to this current event. Which would confirm my guesses, since why would someone scrub his last name Kiser down to K. at LinkedIN unless it was important? He is related to the Kisers of Manti, UT, and I clicked on all of them looking for further links to Kirk.  I drew a blank until I clicked on Ben Catlin on Melissa Kiser’s page.  He links to Candice Hancock, who links to Patricia Berry of Delaware.  See below where the Devooghts link us to Berrys in Ohio, and of course we have already linked to Delaware many times.  

Let’s also follow up on that Matt Devooght thing, which I did manage to grab before they deleted it, as you see above.  Instantcheckmate doesn’t list him in UT or as aka Robinson, instead listing him in Fairborn, OH, and Jersey City, NJ, only related to other Devooghts.  However, the Fairborn, OH, listing may be confirming, since that is near Dayton, and the Kirks I was looking at above are from that area as well.   Finally, Jessica Devooght of this family links us to another name, the Berrys, including Chase Berry, who links us to a Morgan Chase Erwin.  Starting to sound interesting, eh?  Chase’s relative Brice Berry links us to Dillingers.  Am I off on a tangent?  Maybe, maybe not.  The previous hit on Berrys in Utah indicates not.  I repeat, I’m not accusing these Berrys of anything, just making name links. 

But let’s return and click on some of those other names, like Janae Quilter.  There can’t be too many of those.  According to LinkedIN she is 53 and works at the private airport in Heber City, UT, as the front desk manager.  This is where the Lear jets come in, so it may be a clue. Evidence came out today that Kirk was whisked out of Utah in strange fashion on a Lear jet with no filing, no manifest, no crew listed, and no transponder.  Like Payne Stewart’s plane, it came out of Delaware.  Delaware again. Indicating a CIA extraction plane.  Again, not accusing Quilter of anything, just reporting what I find, as a possible piece of the puzzle.  As in any investigation, it may turn out to be true and important later, or it may turn out to be a case of apophenia.     

As a nod to fairness, let’s click on some of the Robinsons given us in the listing of Amber, 44, at

Radaris who is related to Matthew.  They also link us to Quilters, indicating the listing for Matthew Robinson aka Devooght is the right one.  Devooght could still be a computer error, but we now have confirmation Tyler Robinson’s father is the Matt Robinson, 48, not 59.  So those listings at Radaris and Instantcheckmate should link us to Amber, his wife, but do not.  Instead, they link us to a Misty Jean Robinson, 49, who is sharing a POBox in Beaver with Matthew, 48. The Daily Mail gives us no indication Matt and Amber are separated and living in separate towns, though the computer does.  This could all be a computer error, but it is up on the internet and I didn’t make it up.  If you have evidence I am wrong, I would be happy to look at it.  I will list corrections as we go and have already made a couple. 

Finally I went back to the article at the Daily Mail, and lo and behold, after having told us Matt works construction, they admit he is a law enforcement veteran in the subtext to a photo. What, retired at 48, is he?  And we could have guessed he was military or a cop. 

They also have an article about Tyler Robinson’s voting history.  Really, at age 22, just two days out from the event?  According to my math, his voting history would be one election, the last one, and I am guessing he didn’t vote for Trump.  Not much of an article, but it tells you they are in a rush to divide you. 

Erika made a 15-minute speech today after watching her husband have his neck blown off less than 48 hours ago.  These people are shameless, as we know.  She even took the time to plug the Oregon Ducks.  That’s what you would do, right, if your husband just got murdered in such a terrifying fashion: give a long public speech and pepper it with stuff like “Go Ducks!”  If you aren’t sick you don’t have a stomach.  I guess the GoFundMe page is next. 

[Added September 13: Guess what, I was right, though it is GiveSendGo, not GoFundMe, and the Kirk family has already raised three million, though they were already millionaires.  Why would anyone be giving money to millionaires?  He was earning half a million a year from TPUSA, not including appearance fees, and was said by Yahoo to be worth above $12 million.  Way above, I would guess.  And you can be sure Erika will be cashing out a huge life insurance policy.  Will we get a figure for that?  Doubtful.  Also notice the title at that link to the New York Post: as Turning Point USA sees upward of 18,000 new chapter requests overnight Good to see they haven’t retired that aces and eights marker.]

Next the Daily Mail tells us the Robinsons own a granite countertop business.  OK, that is now three things they have told us about that in the same series of articles.  AI needs to get its shite together. They already told us Amber worked for Intermountain Support, a state agency helping the disabled, sob sob, and that Matt worked construction and was veteran law enforcement. 

Here’s a big continuity problem I noticed.

Robinson coming in or out on the day.  But where is the rifle?  We are told he ditched it in a field afterwards, so he should have it both coming and going.  You will say he broke it down and was carrying it in the backpack.  No, they tell us it was an old bolt-action Mauser 30.06:

[They have now leaked the arrest report, and they claim he was seen in video walking with a stiff leg, implying the rifle was down his leg inside his pants.  But this picture also refutes that, since as you see both knees are bent, and he appears to be walking up stairs with no problem.  Walking up stairs with a Mauser down the leg would be quite difficult, and wouldn’t look like this.  The report goes on to claim all his motions were found on various security cameras, and they tell you exactly what he did, including his motions on the rooftop.  But of course that begs this question: both the university and Kirk should have had a person monitoring those cameras.  That is what they are there for.  Not all cameras are monitored 24/7 by an actual person, but during an event like this many in the area would be, for just this reason.  Again, that is what they are there for, and that is why you hire security.  This is one of the things they do, and Kirk was millionaire who had plenty of money for security.  So it makes no sense that we have all this footage afterwards, but that no one was monitoring it at the time.]

It doesn’t break down like that.  If he could have broken it down into a small case, he wouldn’t need to ditch it, would he?  And what kind of moron wraps a rifle like that in a towel and dumps it in the woods near the crime scene?  There are a million ways to dispose of or hide a rifle, starting with throwing it in a lake.  But it is much simpler to hide it under the floor of some house or other structure you don’t live in, like a barn or abandoned house or other structure.  Millions of those around now, after several rounds of crashes.  I say that not to give anyone tips, but to remind you of what we have all seen in movies.  Even the stupidest of us has watched a thousand CIA movies, where they school you on these ideas.  Best not to dump it at all: just put it back in Dad’s gun rack, making up some lie about shooting deer.  Then they can’t trace it back to you.  But this is all almost beside the point, since there was no gun, no shooter, and no death.  Just a blank fired or a shot into a wall and Kirk pretending to die, with fake blood squirting like in an old Monty Python skit, or CGI’ed in after the fact:

 

*The reader who found info on Charlie Kirk has also posted what he found on the Robinsons, which I add here for your possible edification.

H e r e i s t h e i n f o f o r T y l e r R o b i n s o n ’ s f a t h e r M a t t o f W a s h i n g t o n , U T :

https://www.fastpeoplesearch.com/matthew-robinson_id_G-6022270457693378798

He definitely is involved in stone/granite work as well as cabinetry. It shows his wife as Amber Jones, and f u r t h e r d o w n a g e 2 2 , T y l e r ( a s w e l l a s h i s b r o t h e r A u s t i n ) .

https://www.fastpeoplesearch.com/austin-robinson_id_G-1274070616548857119

Austin’s info shows him as a UVU associate graduate in Applied Math while previously working as a call center guy for Sitel Group, and quality assurance for home security companies Simplisafe and Vivint, and also a compliance analyst (whatever that means) for Capital One and Intuit, the guys behind TurboTax. You can see they are all associated with a 71-year old Jim Robinson who turns into Debbie Robinson when you click him lol.

https://www.pineviewmortuary.com/obituary/2149084

That’s the obituary for Tyler’s aunt Crystal Robinson who was born with osteogenesis imperfecta and died in 2013. It lists her brother Matt Robinson married to Amber, and a nephew named Tyler, all of Utah, so it’s definitely them. Notice she had a living grandmother when she died.

https://www.maglebymortuary.com/obituaries/Donna-Johnson

Here is Donna Mae Johnson who died in 2019. It lists her daughter as Debbie Robinson of

Washington, UT and her granddaughter Crystal from above. This would be Tyler Robinson’s greatgrandma.

https://www.familysearch.org/en/tree/pedigree/landscape/KW86-2KZ

And here is their family tree. Leave it to the Mormons to flesh out family trees on their own Mormon genealogy site. We’ve got a treasure trove of surnames and connections to go through here so I’ll be brief as I can.

https://www.familysearch.org/en/tree/person/details/KWJ8-49G

Lorenzo Johnson here was a Mormon polygamist with 4 wives and 20 children. Take the Johnson back all the way and you get Heaths and Baskervilles, Cheneys, Harris, Welds (as in Tuesday Weld), Websters, Baldwins, Nettletons, Pilkingtons, Savilles, Spencers, Burrs who married Hubbards that come from the ultimate Webbs:

https://www.familysearch.org/en/tree/person/LZPQ-GN3

That’s Richard Webb, apparently the son of Alexander Webb whose mother Margaret Arden is the sister of Shakespeare’s mother, making Richard here William

Shakespeare’s cousin once removed. You have to go to Findagrave for that info because on Familysearch it just says that he’s the son John Shakespeare, making him William’s brother. It’s all jumbled up and I have no idea what’s true but he’s obviously a cousin or something. Ardens, Shakespeares, and Webbs intermarried hard for at least 6 generations. And the Webbs link us to the King. Through the Stevens line you get Bradfords going back to governor William Bradford of Plymouth. There is Drury, Rice, Goodrich, Sawyer, Prescott, Platt, Lewis married to a Weld again,

Winters married to Beers-Smith (as in DeBeers the blood diamond barons), Barron, Hawkins,

Hammond, Payne, Humphrey, Packard, Rand, King married to Huxley, Spencer, Seymour,

Hollister, Treat, Austin, Fuller, Brewster (as in William Brewster), Rankin who married Crockets, Sinclair, Spottiswoode leading to Crichton, Lindsay, Barclay, Erskine, Melville, Ramsay, Kerr, Livingstone, and Hepburn.

Through the McIntosh line, go to Keele then Palmer then DeJarnette, married to Bairds/Byrds, specifically the famous Virginian William Byrd. Funny thing, reading his Wikipedia reveals he was instrumental in settling the Swiss into southwestern Virginia (not really southwest, it seems more northeast), and may explain why so many Mennonites settled in Virginia (such as the Custers, Trumbos, and Hersheys). Even more eyebrow-raising is that the DeJarnettes who married Byrds come from French Huguenots, specifically the Marquis Samuel de Jarnette whose son married the daughter of the Rabbi Alta Golden of Strasbourg! The Keeles are also related to the Hess of Pennsylvania, leading to Bentz/Pence (as in Mike Pence), Mahler, Mayer, Hieber, Salzmann,

Pfautz, Henckel, Wagner who married Margarethe daughter of Martin Luther the Protestant (linking Anabaptists and Lutherans as I’ve shown before), Giebel/Goebel, and Hirsfelder. Guess who else is a Salzmann and Wagner? George Lucas, creator of Star Wars. There are more Birds leading to Swedish Fougelbergs/Vogelbergs, Powells, Trumans, Richardsons, Thomas, Morgan, Rees/Rice/Rhys, and Curtis.

Donna Mae Orton goes back to Hillmans that connect to Kings, Austins, and Brewsters (all of which we saw above through the Stevens line). The Woodards/Woodwards go back to Armstrongs, Warrens, Briggs, Wilder (also Sawyer, Prescott, and Platt which we saw above through the Stevens as well), Northrups (as in Northrup-Grumman the defense contractor), Pecks, Brewsters, Gates, Prentice, Hammond, Baldwin, and Palmer. Through Lees you get Doyle, Cunningham, and Pollock.

They married Jungs of Pennsylvania from really old German nobility such as von Seckendorffs. The Williams line goes back to Webster, Chaplin, Wheeler, Gorham, Howland, Robinson (lol), Bacon, and Adams. That brings me to the Lucas family which doesn’t seem to connect to George Lucas; as I said earlier, Robinson and Lucas are connected through Salzmanns/Wagners. Through banking and nobility and Anabaptists, same as George Lucas through Leidy, Grimm, Long, Studebaker, Salzmann, and Wagner.

Final update for the Robinsons, I hope. I finally found their family tree through Janet Oldham, who confirms her confirms her mother’s name as Pauline Walton Robinson whose husband was Drew. Well Drew turned out to be Malcom Drew Robinson and it’s confirmed because the family tree below shows their daughter Janet Oldham. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/58276136/janet-oldham https://www.familysearch.org/en/tree/pedigree/landscape/KW88-8Z2

The Robinsons connect to Littles/Liddells (Biden is a Liddell), Haydens going back to Boleyns,

Goddards, Brighams and Youngs (I hope you’re thinking what I’m thinking), Baldwins, Jones, Savages, Hopkins, Briggs, Arnolds (as in Benedict Arnold), Wentworth (specifically Thomas 6th baron Lespencer whose cousin was Jane Seymour and grandfather James Tyrell the fake killer of the Princes of the Tower), Gorton, Hackett, Adams, Lincoln, Goodman, Temples baronets of Stowe, Throckmorton married to Lucases (2nd appearance) and Vaux (which is where J.D. Vance came from, explaining the use of AirForce2 here), Bacon, Johnson married to Cheneys and Heaths (again, 2nd appearance), Forbush/Forbes, Rice, Morse, Tylers married to the French Huguenot Guiteau, Gore, Hyde, Barne, and Pedrick (tragically linking Robinsons to one of my favorite singers, Robert John Pedrick).

Halfway done. The Tyler Robinson’s great-grandpa married Pauline Marvel Walton. They go back to Nettleton (saw them earlier too), Fleming, Cowan/Cohen, Leathermann (as in David Letterman), Engel, Beyer/Barr, Breyer, Kohl, Richter, Fetzer, Balmer (as in Steve Balmer the 8th richest man in the world), Nagel, Gluck/Glick, Walty/Waelti, Kern, Ott, Vollenweider, Erhart (as in Amelia), Hofstetter, Frick, Huber/Hoover, Van Buren, Bichsler leading to Salzmann (again), Tanner/Donner, Landis, Hiestand, Aeppli, Stauffer/Stover, Lehmann, Egli, Kohler, Moser, Markle/Merckel (do you need me to point out who this is relevant to?), Zimmerman, Kaiser/Kiser/Kisor, Hummel, Wagner, Klein, Bieber, Weber, Widmann, Zwingli and Maurer (the founder of the Swiss Reformation no less), Hahn, Handel, Schwab, Moschberger, Traut, Baer (again), Gerhardt (just a variation of Erhart above). She is incredibly well connected to all the major Anabaptist families, Amish and Mennonite, as well as Swiss Reformers, Lutherans, and French Huguenots. There is also the Cash family and through the Lloyds the Carsons (so Johnny Carson and David Letterman!).  So all this confirms what Miles is saying about the Mormons being founded by Jews, and not just any Jews, Jews from royal and noble lines in Europe.  It also confirms that Kirk and Robinson are both Jews and that they are related.  You will be told we are all related, but not like this.  These people are close cousins.  

https://www.theinteldrop.org/2025/09/14/the-murder-of-charlie-kirk-was-of-course-staged/

 

============================

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_koGTh6T5c

Charlie Kirk, the troublesome priest

 

You don't get to say it's antis*mitic to question whether Israel had a hand in the ass*ssination. Kirk, like Tucker Carlson, was turning away from Israel and Zionism

 

=======================

 

SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN3I2b5Nrk4

 

SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DazOldlSDXI

 

 

The incoming president of the Oxford Union, George Abaraonye, faces disciplinary proceedings and a possible vote of no confidence over his controversial comments about the murder of US conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

The prestigious debating society confirmed that formal complaints had been filed against Abaraonye, which would be “addressed with the utmost seriousness” under disciplinary procedures. The Union cannot summarily dismiss a president-elect, but its rules allow for immediate removal if serious misconduct is proven.

More than 200 life members of the Union – alumni who have retained their membership – have signaled support for a no confidence motion, surpassing the 150-signature threshold required to bring proceedings, according to The Telegraph.

Abaraonye, who debated Kirk at the Union in May, posted celebratory messages on WhatsApp and Instagram after the activist was fatally shot on Wednesday during a campus event in Utah. One message read: “CHARLIE KIRK GOT SHOT LET’S F****** GO,” while another said: “Charlie Kirk got shot loool.”

He later deleted the remarks, insisting they were made before Kirk’s death was confirmed, and issued a partial apology. He blamed Kirk’s “horrific and dehumanising statements” regarding gun rights, Gaza, and LGBTQ issues for shaping his “impulsive” reaction.

The Union leadership condemned Abaraonye’s words as “inappropriate, insensitive and unacceptable,” arguing that “free speech cannot and will not come at the expense of violence, intimidation, or hate.”

The Union also denounced threats Abaraonye has reportedly faced since the comments became public. “No individual should ever be attacked because of the color of their skin or the community they come from,” it said.

Under Union rules, a no confidence motion cannot be submitted until the start of the new term on October 12. For the motion to succeed, it must gather 150 signatures within 48 hours, followed by a debate and vote open to all student and life members.

Kirk, 31, the founder of Turning Point USA, was shot dead while speaking at Utah Valley University in what many described as a politically motivated assassination. Tyler Robinson, 22, has been charged with aggravated murder.

https://www.rt.com/news/624656-oxford-debate-president-disciplinary/

 

===================

 

MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The society in the United States is now extremely polarized, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Sunday, commenting on the assassination of US conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

"It is up to American law enforcement to figure out whether these are some isolated incidents or some kind of a trend, which is much worse. But the fact that society is extremely polarized now is true," Peskov told Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin.

Kirk, one of Trump's key allies, was fatally shot at a mass event at Utah Valley University. He is survived by his wife and two children. He spoke out against aid to Ukraine, called Volodymyr Zelensky an obstacle to peace and a "CIA puppet." He also emphasized that Crimea had always been part of Russia.

This is not the first time an assassination attempt has been made on a politician who opposes aid to Ukraine. In May 2024, a pro-Ukrainian radical attempted to shoot Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, who was hospitalized in critical condition. That same year, there were two attempts to kill then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, who had previously questioned US aid to Ukraine. CNN reported that Kirk had played a key role in Trump's victory in the election, ensuring a good turnout among young people.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20250914/kremlin-spokesman-on-charlie-kirks-murder-us-society-now-extremely-polarized-1122784370.html

 

========================

 

Jessica Corbett

US State Dept 'reviewing' foreigner comment on Kirk killing

 

“The US Government, seeking to punish those who make light of the incident, is a complete betrayal of the First Amendment and spits in the face of the principle of free speech and debate,” said one lawyer.

“So much for free speech.”

That’s how multiple social media users  responded on Thursday after a top official signalled on the platform X that the US Department of State will review foreigners’ remarks on the Wednesday killing of Turning Point USA chief executive and co-founder Charlie Kirk, a key ally of Republican President Donald Trump.

“In light of yesterday’s horrific assassination of a leading political figure, I want to underscore that foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,” Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau  wrote on Thursday morning.

“I have been disgusted to see some on social media praising, rationalising, or making light of the event, and have directed our consular officials to undertake appropriate action,” Landau added. “Please feel free to bring such comments by foreigners to my attention so that the State Department can protect the American people.”

Lawyers swiftly stressed that the comments Landau is aiming to track down would be “fully protected speech under the First Amendment” to the US Constitution.

American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick said, “You can agree that it’s a tragedy that a man was assassinated and also believe that the US Government seeking to punish those who make light of the incident is a complete betrayal of the First Amendment and spits in the face of the principle of free speech and debate.

“It is appalling to see US Government officials trying to police the speech of people outside the US and to direct consular officers to deny and strip visas from anyone who made a joke about Charlie Kirk’s assassination – and rely on X for reports,” he continued. “The First Amendment applies to the federal government; ‘Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech’. Directing people to have a benefit denied and potentially be deported over a joke in very poor taste violates the First Amendment.”

After one X user suggested visitors to the United States don’t have the same rights as citizens, Reichlin-Melnick explained that “the First Amendment is a restriction on government action that applies even when the government seeks to restrict the speech of noncitizens. If you’d like, I can cite you dozens of court cases confirming that noncitizens enjoy First Amendment protections.”

Kirk and his allies — including Trump — have long framed the late 31-year-old as a free speech supporter. A lengthy pop-up message about his death on the Turning Point USA website even says that “Charlie has become America’s greatest martyr to the freedom of speech he so adored.”

In response to Axios’ reporting on Landau’s threat, Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, sarcastically said: “Yes, this definitely seems like an appropriate and constitutional use of the State Department’s surveillance authorities. And definitely a fitting way to honour a person whom Trump admin officials have labelled a First Amendment hero.”

Writer Miriam Elder similarly quipped, “The free speech government honouring the free speech martyr.”

Trump also publicly fancies himself a protector of free speech, but since returning to office in January, he has targeted law firms that represent clients and causes he opposes, news outlets whose coverage he disagrees with, and foreign students who criticise Israel’s US-backed genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

Although elected officials across the US political spectrum have condemned Kirk’s killing and his unidentified shooter remains at large, Trump claimed in a Wednesday night speech that the rhetoric of the “radical left” is “directly responsible” for his death.

The president also pledged that his administration “will find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organisations that fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials, and everyone else who brings order to our country".

While Kirk’s fatal shooting has sparked widespread condemnation of all political violence, the far-right crusader’s longtime critics have also highlighted his attacks on marginalised people, promotion of misinformation and conspiracy theories, and strong opposition to stricter gun laws – including his assertion that “it’s worth to have a cost of unfortunately some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment".

Landau wasn’t the only key official making threats about commentary on Kirk’s killing. Congressman Clay Higgins (R-La.) said on X early on Thursday that “I’m going to use congressional authority and every influence with Big Tech platforms to mandate immediate ban for life of every post or commenter that belittled the assassination of Charlie Kirk".

“If they ran their mouth with their smartass hatred celebrating the heinous murder of that beautiful young man who dedicated his whole life to delivering respectful conservative truth into the hearts of liberal enclave universities, armed only with a Bible and a microphone and a Constitution… those profiles must come down,” he said. “So, I’m going to lean forward in this fight, demanding that Big Tech have zero tolerance for violent political hate content, the user to be banned from ALL PLATFORMS FOREVER.

“I’m also going after their business licences and permitting, their businesses will be blacklisted aggressively, they should be kicked from every school, and their driver’s licences should be revoked,” he added. “I’m basically going to cancel with extreme prejudice these evil, sick animals who celebrated Charlie Kirk’s assassination. I’m starting that today. That is all.”

Several X users responded with examples of Higgins’ long history of problematic commentary.

Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression chief executive Greg Lukianoff told Higgins: “No. The state may not coerce private institutions to censor speech that the state itself cannot censor under the First Amendment. Besides, you are not safer for knowing LESS about what people really think.”

https://www.commondreams.org/news/charlie-kirk-free-speech

 

=========================

 

Kirk’s death reinvigorates Republicans’ redistricting race

In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s death, Republicans gathered at a summit in Indiana, where they memorialized the conservative activist and rallied the party to press forward with redistricting in the state.

 

President Donald Trump’s already brass-knuckled push for red-state redistricting is taking on an increasingly apocalyptic valence among MAGA stalwarts following the killing of Charlie Kirk.

Inside an Embassy Suites ballroom in suburban Indianapolis this weekend, Sen. Jim Banks’ inaugural Hoosier Leadership for America Summit drew hundreds of attendees who came to hear from next-generation MAGA figures ranging from Alex Bruesewitz, a top Trump adviser and longtime friend of Kirk’s, to GOP strategist Alex DeGrasse.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/14/charlie-kirk-indiana-redistricting-00563252

 

================

 

I don’t spend any time on social media nor do I have any interest in the mainstream conservative movement, so I’d only been very slightly aware of Charlie Kirk prior to his sudden assassination on Wednesday, shot dead at the age of 31 by a sniper while speaking at the University of Utah.

I’d vaguely known that Kirk was a young conservative activist who had dropped out of community college as a teenager about a dozen years earlier to found Turning Point USA, an activist organization intended to draw youthful Americans into his ideological camp, and heavily funded by mega-donors, it had grown large and successful over time. Those bare facts exhausted my total knowledge.

Given that I’d paid so little attention to him, I was initially shocked by the enormous outpouring of media coverage his killing generated, seemingly greater than might have been accorded many important American elected officials or even major world leaders under similar circumstances. All our top newspapers gave his story large, front-page headlines, and the discussion of Kirk’s assassination and its implications entirely blanketed much of the Internet.

I’d always regarded Kirk as a rather bland mainstream Trump conservative, hardly the sort of figure most likely to inspire lethal hatred. I wondered whether my impression had been mistaken so I sought to assess his views and positions, and get a better sense of why he might have been targeted in that deadly attack.

Given his brutal slaying at such a young age, I was hardly surprised that a large fraction of the commentary amounted to hagiography, with even most of his erstwhile ideological foes mourning his death as a tragedy and casting aside any past criticism. Indeed, when Matthew Dowd, a prominent former Bush-Cheney Republican political consultant made some disparaging remarks about Kirk, he was immediately fired from his longstanding position at MSNBC, demonstrating the risks of straying from that widespread position.

 

Fortunately, I found some important exceptions to this pattern of unremitting praise.

I’d occasionally read pieces by Michael Tracey, a prominent moderate or liberal-leaning Internet writer and the day after Kirk’s death he published a harsh 1,400 word column providing a very different perspective on Kirk.

Many of Kirk’s supporters had described him as a political truth-teller, with President Donald Trump declaring that he had been “a martyr for truth.” But Tracey was scathing in his criticism, portraying him as essentially a political propagandist, someone who regularly shifted his positions to conform to those of Trump, his leading patron:

He was a government functionary. A mouthpiece. He trafficked in ludicrous propaganda on behalf of the Administration he loyally served. And was doing this basically 24/7, in the extremely recent past.

Perhaps most notoriously, after taking a personal phone call from Donald Trump, Charlie Kirk hopped on his podcast the next day and proclaimed, “Honestly, I’m done talking about Epstein for the time being. I’m gonna trust my friends in the administration. I’m gonna trust my friends in the government.” He then bizarrely tried to deny that he said this, or insist it had somehow been taken out of context — which it hadn’t. The context was that Trump got annoyed that a bunch of people had criticized him over Epstein at Kirk’s “Turning Point USA” conference, and then Trump called up Kirk, and then shortly thereafter, Kirk announced he was going to do the government’s bidding. That’s just what Kirk was, and the role he played in US political affairs — notwithstanding how people might now want to exalt him as a paragon of truth-telling virtue because of his untimely death.

His conduct was even more egregious in the run-up to Trump bombing Iran in June. During that episode, he pretty much served as a blatant government disinformation agent. Harsh as that might sound after he was brutally gunned down yesterday, it’s simply true. His mission was to demand uncritical faith in the US government, during a time of war — which is totally inexcusable for anyone who would consider themselves anything even remotely approximating a “journalist.” But that’s clearly not what Charlie Kirk considered himself. He instead considered himself a government media mouthpiece. On April 3, he said “A new Middle East war would be a catastrophic mistake.” Then by June 17, as drumbeats for the joint US-Israeli war against Iran were intensifying to full volume, Charlie changed his tune to mollify Trump, whom his whole identity was built around sycophantically serving. “It is possible to be an extreme isolationist,” Charlie Kirk warned his massive audience. “President Donald Trump is a man made for this moment, and we should trust him.” This was just pathetic. Turn off your critical thinking skills and place unquestioning “trust” in the US government to wage a war on false pretenses! What awesome, noble “truth-telling”!

Kirk then called for Trump to receive the Nobel Peace Prize, for the peace-bringing act of launching a new war in the Middle East. As I wrote at the time, “The shamelessness of these people has no bottom — it’s gotten to the point where you just have to marvel at the spectacle.” That was Charlie Kirk. He openly deceived his viewers and listeners, falsely insisting that Trump had been courageously pursuing “peace,” when in reality Trump was mobilizing for war in conjunction with Israel. At the time, I labeled Kirk a “depraved minion” for doing what he did, and I’m not about to retract that accusation just because he got killed yesterday. That would be absurd.

“We must trust Trump,” declared Charlie Kirk, the martyred truth-teller:

 

Even more hostile was the reaction of right-wing Internet provocateur Andrew Anglin, who maintained his angry, contrarian reputation by quickly publishing a series of posts ferociously denouncing the slain conservative activist. The lengthiest of these drew more than 500 comments on our website, with Anglin’s deeply emotional reaction probably explaining the obviously missing word in his title.

Sharply attacking Kirk from the right, Anglin eagerly dredged up quotes that demonstrated the victim’s notably liberal views on various hot-button issues. This hardly surprised me since it merely reflected the leftward shift of our conservative movement, whose right-wing MAGA partisans these days espouse many positions on social issues that might have been marked them as extreme progressives as recently as the 1990s.

For example, Anglin noted that one of Kirk’s Tweets praised Trump’s strong support for global gay rights and condemned the media for failing to give the president sufficient credit on that score:

 

 

Anglin also highlighted another Kirk clip in which the conservative activist ridiculed the academic dogma that there are 47 different genders while strongly affirming his own support for ordinary transgenderism, saying that men had the right to declare themselves women and vice-versa.

This last example seems to perfectly exemplify the nature of our modern conservative movement. The promotion of totally insane ideas by the mainstream media and the academic community has provided self-proclaimed conservatives with considerable necessary cover, allowing them to win popular support by proudly advocating ideas that are only somewhat less insane in comparison.

As an example of Kirk’s personal support for transgenderism, Anglin noted that his organization heavily promoted an activist of that ilk called “Lady MAGA,” going much farther in that regard than most other pro-Trump conservatives. This certainly seemed to contradict early media reports suggesting that Kirk had been killed for his hostility to transgenderism.

According to Anglin, Kirk had also been a leading proponent of the notion that “America is an idea,” with our ideology and our constitutional principles defining what it means to be an American. Anglin located a 2019 clip in which Kirk took exactly this position, while simultaneously proclaiming that Israel should rightly remain “a blood and soil nation,” falling into a different category because of the holy connection to its land:

Video Link

As with many conservatives, Kirk apparently had some strong libertarian roots, and during Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign he had emphasized that wide open America could easily accommodate almost unlimited numbers of hard-working, productive legal immigrants. Anglin actually claimed that Kirk had invented the meme of “stapling green cards to diplomas” and indeed in this clip the latter proposed that any foreigner who graduated from an American university should be issued a green card allowing permanent legal residency. Kirk even suggested that our country could reasonably absorb an astonishing fifty million new legal immigrants over the next ten years.

Anglin was obviously mining Kirk’s record to find those public statements most likely to infuriate the many right-wingers now mourning Kirk’s martyrdom, and I’m sure that clips could also be found in which Kirk sometimes took the opposite side of these same issues. For example, by 2023 he had apparently proposed halting all immigration.

But that’s the crucial point. Like so many other conservative activists, Kirk’s views on most ideological issues were hardly set in stone, and instead might easily change over time as Trump and other national leaders of his movement chose to move in different directions. This hardly indicated that Kirk was the sort of fanatic ideologue most likely to attract a deadly assassin.

All of this suggested that Tracey’s more cynical criticism of Kirk was probably much closer to the mark.

 

Meanwhile, the actual circumstances of Kirk’s killing raised all sorts of questions in my mind.

From media reports I soon discovered that Kirk had received many death threats over the years. Therefore, he had taken steps to ensure that he was extremely well protected against any such attack, surrounding himself with a professional security detail while also wearing body-armor. But none of that availed him against the sniper who killed him with a single, well-placed shot, hitting him in the neck from a distance of around 200 yards.

Over the years and the decades, considerable numbers of prominent Americans had been targeted by an assassin’s bullets but almost none of them had ever been killed in such a classic manner. Instead, a large majority of the victims were shot at close range with simple handguns, and the deranged attackers were often immediately apprehended at the scene.

Consider the case of last year’s killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Robert Thompson by someone angry over health insurance policies, with the corporate executive shot as he entered a midtown Manhattan hotel, totally unprotected against any such attack. Earlier this year, a Minnesota state representative and her husband had both been killed at home by an agitated gunman who merely knocked on their front-door.

Indeed, I would suspect that Kirk was better protected against any lethal attack than well over than 99% of the all the American elected officials, senior corporate executives, billionaires, and Hollywood celebrities who constitute the most likely targets. Thus, his killing demonstrated how easily almost any of our public figures could be killed by a determined attacker. Many such influential individuals may certainly take this lesson to heart, perhaps leading them to support severe crackdowns on our civil liberties in order to reduce their personal risks.

Even last year’s two unsuccessful assassination attacks against Trump during his presidential campaign seemed far less professional than Kirk’s killing. In each case, the carelessness and incompetence of the attacker was balanced out by the severe security lapses of Trump’s Secret Service team.

A sniper firing at long range seems the most classic sort of professional political assassination but the last such examples that come to my mind were the 1960s killings of JFK and MLK, and only the former was captured for posterity on the famous Zapruder film. Just as with the Kirk assassination, the killing of Kennedy in Dallas also involved a heavily-guarded public figure slain by a sniper who initially escaped, with the attack captured on video, but in that earlier case the film was only released many years later, greatly diminishing the emotional impact of the crime. So in many regards, the closest historical parallel to Kirk’s assassination was that of JFK sixty-two years earlier.

 

Unfortunately, far darker parallels between the Kennedy and Kirk assassinations almost immediately came to my mind once I’d heard of the latter’s death.

As I’d mentioned, for the last dozen years I’d paid almost no attention to Kirk or his political activities, but that had begun to change over the last couple of months. After Trump reversed himself on the release of the Jeffrey Epstein documents, a huge political firestorm had erupted, with many erstwhile Trump supporters expressing a sense of bitter betrayal. This led me to publish a long article about the controversy and the broader issue of blackmail in American politics.

Towards the beginning of my discussion, I’d noted that Tucker Carlson had been invited to speak at the national convention of Kirk’s organization. Carlson had used that opportunity to very courageously inform all those thousands of young conservative activists that almost everyone in DC assumed that Epstein had been working for the Israeli Mossad, providing that foreign spy organization with the blackmail evidence it used to maintain control of our own elected officials.

For generations, the American conservative movement has been notoriously pro-Israel, so I was greatly surprised that the huge audience of young conservatives overcame their lifelong indoctrination, strongly supporting Carlson’s bold statements and even giving him wild cheers.

Former FoxNews host Tucker Carlson is probably the biggest figure in today’s fragmented media landscape and a crucial supporter of Donald Trump. But he and many others like him have strongly denounced the administration’s reversal on the release of the Epstein files.

The largest youthful pro-Trump organization is called Turning Point USA, and Carlson happened to give a speech to the huge audience at their annual convention a few days after Trump’s decision. He dramatically declared that that not a single person he knew in DC doubted that Epstein had been running a blackmail operation on behalf of the Israeli Mossad, and despite that controversial statement his speech drew widespread cheers. This suggests that his remarks—and the positive reaction they attracted—may themselves mark “a turning point” in what had been decades of uniformly pro-Israel sentiments among American conservatives. So ideas once marginalized or considered entirely forbidden may now apparently be freely discussed, sometimes even attracting widespread support, and this may be the most important lasting legacy of the current political firestorm over the Epstein files.

Video Link

Indeed, given Carlson’s words only the most willfully blind could fail to connect such Mossad operations with the unwavering levels of support that Israel has long enjoyed from our members of Congress. Over the last couple of years, nearly the entire rest of the world has come to regard Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as one of modern history’s worst war-criminals, now under indictment by the International Court of Justice for his horrific ongoing massacre of Gaza’s helpless civilians. But when he has visited Congress, the trained barking seals of that political body have provided him endless standing ovations. Obviously the money and media deployed by the Israel Lobby explain most of this behavior, but the powerful role of blackmail has almost certainly supplemented those factors.

The notion that many of our own elected officials are being ruthlessly blackmailed by a foreign power must surely outrage most patriotic Americans, and the increasing circulation of these ideas may eventually have important consequences. Just a few days after Carlson’s remarkable speech, Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of the fiercest MAGA partisans in Congress, surprisingly joined with Democrats Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, two of her most leftwing colleagues, in voting to cut U.S. funding for Israel. This resolution only attracted a handful of supporters, but small cracks in a dam sometimes presage much larger breaks.

• American Pravda: Jeffrey Epstein, the Franklin Scandal, Pedophilia, and Political Blackmail
  Ron Unz • The Unz Review • July 28, 2025 • 12,300 Words

In the weeks after Carlson’s remarkably candid speech and the reaction it drew, I’d come across a few scattered indications that Kirk was becoming far more publicly critical of Israel, perhaps even starting to follow the political trajectory of Candace Owens, who had originally come from a very similar ideological background.

Although I hadn’t been aware of it at the time, within hours of Kirk’s assassination, one of his past video clips sharply condemning the anti-white activism of Jewish groups in America went viral on the Internet, with this single Tweet viewed nearly six million times:

 

Given Kirk’s enormous popularity among conservative youth, the consequences of such a shift might have been enormous so Kirk’s sudden, very professional assassination raised dark suspicions in my mind.

Earlier this year I’d published an article summarizing Israel’s long history of high-profile political assassinations, a record unmatched in all of world history, and this particular incident certainly fit very well into that pattern.

• Zionist Israel as the Assassination Nation
  Ron Unz • The Unz Review • June 23, 2025 • 11,800 Words

Three months earlier I’d summarized the strong even overwhelming evidence that Israel had played a central role in the deaths of both President Kennedy and his younger brother Robert, and the parallels with Kirk’s killing seemed quite apparent.

• How Israel Killed the Kennedys
  Ron Unz • The Unz Review • March 24, 2025 • 11,500 Words

 

Therefore, a few hours after hearing of Kirk’s death, I very gingerly raised these possibilities with someone well situated in conservative circles who personally knew Kirk, and was shocked by his response. He unequivocally told me that everyone in Kirk’s circle, even including important Trump Administration officials, suspected that Israel had probably killed the young conservative leader. While such beliefs might not necessarily be correct, I was astonished that they were apparently so widespread without even a hint of those notions reported anywhere in the mainstream or conservative media.

But two days later, this media silence was dramatically broken as the story I’d been privately told by a conservative insider was fully confirmed by a revelatory articlepublished in the Grayzone. 

I’d strongly urge that everyone read the entire 2,100 word piece by editors Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil. But the information reported by those two investigative journalists seems so explosively important that I feel compelled to quote it at very considerable length:

Charlie Kirk rejected an offer earlier this year from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to arrange a massive new infusion of Zionist money into his Turning Point USA (TPUSA) organization, America’s largest conservative youth association, according to a longtime friend of the slain commentator speaking on the condition of anonymity. The source told The Grayzone that the late pro-Trump influencer believed Netanyahu was trying to cow him into silence as he began to publicly question Israel’s overwhelming influence in Washington and demanded more space to criticize it.

In the weeks leading up to his September 10 assassination, Kirk had come to loathe the Israeli leader, regarding him as a “bully,” the source said. Kirk was disgusted by what he witnessed inside the Trump administration, where Netanyahu sought to personally dictate the president’s personnel decisions, and weaponized Israeli assets like billionaire donor Miriam Adelson to keep the White House firmly under its thumb.

According to Kirk’s friend, who also enjoyed access to President Donald Trump and his inner circle, Kirk strongly warned Trump last June against bombing Iran on Israel’s behalf. “Charlie was the only person who did that,” they said, recalling how Trump “barked at him” in response and angrily shut down the conversation. The source believes the incident confirmed in Kirk’s mind that the president of the United States had fallen under the control of a malign foreign power, and was leading his own country into a series of disastrous conflicts.

By the following month, Kirk had become the target of a sustained private campaign of intimidation and free-floating fury by wealthy and powerful allies of Netanyahu – figures he described in an interview as Jewish “leaders” and “stakeholders.”

“He was afraid of them,” the source emphasized.

At TPUSA, the rift with Israel widens

Kirk was 18 years old when he launched TPUSA in 2012. From its inception, his career was propelled by Zionist donors, who showered his young organization with money through neoconservative outfits like the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He repaid his wealthy backers over the years by unleashing a relentless firehose of anti-Palestinian and Islamophobic diatribes, accepting propaganda trips to Israel, and sternly shutting down nationalist forces challenging his support for Israel during TPUSA events. In the Trump era, few American gentiles had proved more valuable to the self-proclaimed Jewish state than Charlie Kirk.

But as Israel’s genocidal assault on the besieged Gaza Strip drove an unprecedented backlash within grassroots right-wing circles, where only 24% of younger Republicans now sympathize with Israel over the Palestinians, Kirk began to shift. At times, he toed the Israeli line, spreading disinformation about babies beheaded by Hamas on October 7, and denying the famine imposed on the population of Gaza. Yet he simultaneously ceded to his base, wondering aloud if Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli intelligence asset, questioning whether the Israeli government allowed the October 7 attacks to proceed in order to advance long-term political goals, and parroting narratives familiar to his most vociferous critic on the right, streamer Nick Fuentes.

This July, at his TPUSA Student Action Summit, Kirk provided a forum for the right-wing grassroots to vent its fury about Israel’s political hammerlock on the Trump administration. There, speakers from former Fox News stalwarts Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, to the anti-Zionist Jewish comedian Dave Smith, denounced Israel’s blood-soaked assault on the besieged Gaza Strip, branded Jeffrey Epstein as an Israeli intelligence asset, and openly taunted Zionist billionaires like Bill Ackman for “getting away with scams” despite having “no actual skills.”

 

Following the confab, Kirk was bombarded with infuriated text messages and phone calls from Netanyahu’s wealthy allies in the US, including many who had funded TPUSA. According to his longtime friend, the Zionist donors treated Kirk with outright contempt, essentially ordering him to fall back into line.

“He was being told what you’re not allowed to do, and it was driving him crazy,” Kirk’s friend recalled. The conservative youth leader was not only alienated by the hostile nature of the interactions, but “frightened” by the backlash.

The friend’s account dovetails with those of multiple right-wing commentators with access to Kirk.

“I think, in the end, Charlie was going through a spiritual transformation,” Candace Owens, a conservative influencer who shifted decisively against Israel after October 7, reflected after her friend’s killing. “I know it, he was going through a lot. There was a lot of pressure, and it’s hard for me to watch the people who were pressuring him just say the things that they’re saying.”

She continued: “They wanted him to lose everything for changing or even slightly modifying an opinion. It’s very hurtful to me.”

Kirk appeared visibly outraged during an August 6 interview with conservative host Megyn Kelly, as he discussed the menacing messages he was receiving from pro-Israel bigwigs.

“It’s all of the sudden: ‘oh, Charlie: he’s no longer with us.’ Wait a second—what does ‘with us’ mean, exactly? I’m an American, okay? I represent this country,” he explained, before addressing the powerful Zionist interests harassing him.

“The more that you guys privately and publicly call our character into question—which is not isolated, it would be one thing if it were just one text, or two texts; it is dozens of texts—then we start to say, ‘whoa, hold the boat here,’” Kirk continued. “To be fair, some really good Jewish friends say, ‘that’s not all of us’… But these are leaders here. These are stakeholders.”

He went on to complain to Kelly, “I have less ability… to criticize the Israeli government than actual Israelis do. And that’s really, really weird.”

In one of his final interviews, conducted with Israel’s premier influencer in the United States, Ben Shapiro, Kirk once again tried to raise the issue of censorship of Israel critics.

“A friend said to me, interestingly: ‘Charlie, okay, we’ve pushed back against the media on COVID, on lockdowns, on Ukraine, on the border,’” Kirk told Shapiro on September 9. “Maybe we should also ask the question: is the media totally presenting the truth when it comes to Israel? Just a question!”

According to Kirk’s longtime friend, Kirk’s resentment of Netanyahu and the Israel lobby was spreading within Trump’s inner circle. In fact, they said, the president himself was terrified of Netanyahu’s wrath, and feared the consequences of defying him.

During the past year, the Trump insider was told by contacts in the White House that the Secret Service had caught Israeli government personnel placing electronic devices on its emergency response vehicles on two separate occasions.

While The Grayzone was unable to confirm the story with the Secret Service or White House, such an incident would not have been unprecedented. Indeed, according to a report in Politico citing three former senior US officials, a cellphone spying device was placed by Israeli agents “near the White House and other sensitive locations around Washington” toward the end of Trump’s first term in 2019.

Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson recounted a similar incident in his memoir, writing that his security team found a listening device in his bathroom soon after Netanyahu used his personal toilet.

The Israel-did-it theory

Kirk was killed this September 10 with a single shot fired by a sniper apparently positioned on a rooftop 200 meters away. He was shot while seated before a crowd of thousands at Utah State University in Orem, Utah on the first leg of his American Comeback Tour. The scene of Kirk collapsing from the impact of a gunshot to his neck just as he began answering a question about transgender mass shooters was perhaps the most shockingly vivid spectacle of assassination – and certainly the most viral – in human history.

There is currently no evidence of an Israeli government role in Kirk’s assassination. However, that has not stopped thousands of social media users from speculating that the pro-Trump operative’s shifting views on the issue contributed in some way to his death. By the time of publication, over 100,000 Twitter/X users have liked a September 11 post by libertarian influencer Ian Carroll declaring about Kirk, “He was their friend. He basically dedicated his life to them. And they murdered him in front of his family. Israel just shot themselves.”

Many advancing the unsubstantiated theory have pointed to a Twitter/X post by Harrison Smith, a personality at the pro-Trump Infowars network, stating on August 13 – almost a month before Kirk’s assassination – that he was told by “someone close to Charlie Kirk that Kirk thinks Israel will kill him if he turns against Israel.”

The frenzied speculation has set off shockwaves in Tel Aviv, where Netanyahu was compelled to explicitly deny that his government killed Kirk during a September 11 interview with NewsMax.

Netanyahu and his allies bury the Kirk crisis as “big tent” collapses

That appearance was just one of several interviews and statements the Prime Minister dedicated to Kirk in the wake of his killing in an effort to frame the late conservative leader’s legacy in a uniformly pro-Israel light. The major public relations push has occurred while Netanyahu wages a military campaign on seven fronts, punctuated by a regional assassination spree that most recently reached into the heart of Qatar, a US ally.

Netanyahu first tweeted prayers for Kirk at 3:02 PM in the afternoon on September 10, minutes after news of the shooting broke. He has since authored three additional posts about Kirk, even breaking away from the Israeli war cabinet to spend the afternoon of September 11 memorializing the conservative leader on Fox News.

During that interview, Netanyahu did his best to insinuate that Israel’s enemies were responsible for murdering Kirk, despite the fact no suspect was named or in custody at the time:

“The radical Islamists and their union with the ultra-progressives—they often speak about ‘human rights,’ they speak about ‘free speech’—but they use violence to try to take down their enemies,” the Prime Minister told Harris Faulkner.

In a September 10 Twitter/X post eulogizing the conservative leader, the Israeli Prime Minister described a recent phone conversation with Kirk.

“I spoke to him only two weeks ago and invited him to Israel,” Netanyahu declared. “Sadly, that visit will not take place.”

Left unmentioned was whether Kirk declined the invitation—just as he did with the Prime Minister’s offer to reload TPUSA’s coffers with donations from his coterie of wealthy American Jewish cutouts.

At the time of publication, a 22-year-old resident of Utah has been taken into custody after supposedly confessing to killing Kirk. The public may soon learn the true motives of the alleged assassin. Perhaps they will fuel the narrative which Trump and his allies advanced in the immediate wake of the shooting – that a leftist radical was responsible, and that a wave of draconian repression must follow.

But after the shooter’s initial escape and a series of federal law enforcement mishaps, a large sector of Americans will likely never believe the official story. Nor will they ever know where Kirk’s turning point on Israel would have taken the conservative movement.

Four days before the assassination, frustration among pro-Israel commentators bubbled over in public during an Fox News interviewin which Ben Shapiro launched a chilling attack on Kirk without naming him.

“The problem with a ‘big tent’ is that you may end up with many clowns inside,” Shapiro told Fox host and fellow Zionist gatekeeper Mark Levin in an apparent critique of TPUSA.

“Just because you’re saying somebody votes Republican—that doesn’t mean that they ought to be the preacher at the front of the church, they’re not the person that ought to be leading the movement, if they are spending all day criticizing the President of the United States as ‘covering up a Mossad rape ring’ or ‘being a tool of the Israelis for hitting an Iranian nuclear facility.’”

When Kirk took his usual place at the “front of the church” four days later, he was cut down by a sniper’s bullet.

Within 24 hours of Kirk’s death, Shapiro announced that he would be launching his own campus speaking tour, vowing: “We’re gonna pick up that blood stained microphone where Charlie left it.”

• Charlie Kirk refused Netanyahu funding offer, was ‘frightened’ by pro-Israel forces before death, friend reveals
  Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil • The Grayzone • September 12, 2025 • 2,100 Words

 

For those who prefer a different medium, an excellent video Tweeted out by Propaganda & Co. covers much of this same material, and has already attracted more than a million views after just one day.

 

The authorities have announced that the alleged assassin has now been caught, and it’s very possible that the official story will turn out to be entirely correct.

Nonetheless, it seems clear that Kirk had increasingly moved into sharp conflict with Israel and therefore apparently feared for his life at that hands of a country whose record of political assassinations is unrivaled across all of human history. Moreover, immediately after Kirk’s violent death, his place was taken by Ben Shapiro, a Jewish Zionist known to be one of America’s fiercest public supporters for Israel, someone who had sharply attacked Kirk on that very issue just four days before the latter’s death.

These obviously seem like very dangerous and suspicious circumstances, but perhaps Kirk was instead killed by a young activist angered over his insufficiently strong support for transgenderism. Odd coincidences do sometimes happen.

However, there do seem to be quite a number of strange elements in the official narrative of the assassination as provided by the police authorities and reported in the media. For example, we were immediately told that after the sniper fled, he abandoned his rifle on a wooded footpath and police discovered that his unexpended shells were inscribed with various hostile statements. But when photos were released of the alleged gunman making his way off the rooftop, there was no sign that he was carrying any such rifle.

These and other anomalies have begun circulating around the Internet, and although they may soon be explained away or otherwise debunked, I think we should keep an open mind on what really happened until any such loose ends are fully resolved. Many of these are summarized in a rather lengthy video Tweeted out by Jackson Hinkle.

ndeed, in the last twenty-four hours, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox announced that the suspect arrested in the Kirk assassination has pleaded not guilty and is refusing to cooperate with investigators.

Meanwhile, some of the supposed evidence against the suspect has now been sharply called into question in another video released by Propaganda & Co.

 

Related Reading:

• Charlie Kirk refused Netanyahu funding offer, was ‘frightened’ by pro-Israel forces before death, friend reveals by Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil
• American Pravda: Jeffrey Epstein, the Franklin Scandal, Pedophilia, and Political Blackmail
• Zionist Israel as the Assassination Nation
• How Israel Killed the Kennedys
• Yes, the killing of Charlie Kirk was heinous. No, he was not a martyred truth-teller by Michael Tracey

https://www.unz.com/runz/the-assassination-of-charlie-kirk/

 

===================

 

A divisive South Park episode mocking Charlie Kirk and other MAGA firebrands was pulled from cable after the conservative influencer was assassinated at a Utah Valley University rally. 

Comedy Central has taken down an episode of the adult cartoon titled Got a Nut amid the backlash following Kirk's untimely death on Wednesday afternoon. 

Season 27, episode two of the popular series sparked an instantaneous uproar when it aired in early August. 

The bizarre episode follows school counselor Mr. Mackey pursuing a career with the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) after he loses his job due to federal budget cuts. 

Parody versions of Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, President Donald Trump and Vice President JC Vance appear.

While Noem shoots at innocent dogs and Trump is seen in bed with the devil, the plot also follows character Eric Cartman, who imitates Kirk. 

Cartman launches a podcast and starts debating 'woke, liberal students,' just as Kirk was known for doing. 

In one portion of the show, Cartman fights with a college student on the topic of abortion, mirroring Kirk's blunt and combative style and his physical features. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15087031/Comedy-Central-south-park-Charlie-Kirk.html

 

=================

 

Newsday forced to apologize for ‘vile’ Charlie Kirk political cartoon after igniting call for boycott: ‘Crossed a line’
By Carl Campanile, Brandon Cruz and Zoe Hussain

 

A Long Island newspaper was forced to apologize Sunday for a political cartoon on the assassination of Charlie Kirk after it ignited a firestorm for the “vile” and “insensitive” piece.

Newsday admitted it should have never printed the cartoon, which appeared in its Saturday paper and depicted an empty chair with a blood stain sitting at a tent labeled “Charlie Kirk” and “Prove me Wrong.”

An arrow points to the seat with the text “Turning Point USA,” which is the name of the conservative nonprofit co-founded by Kirk.

The controversial drawing, penned by Pulitzer finalist illustrator Chip Bok, quickly ignited outrage on the island.

 

“Newsday—the only daily paper for Long Island—has crossed a line. By publishing a vile cartoon about the political assassination of Charlie Kirk, the paper has mocked tragedy, stoked division, and poured gasoline on the flames of political violence,” Suffolk County Republican Party Chairman Jesse Garcia said in a statement.

“This isn’t journalism. It’s a reckless, partisan attack that blames the victim, silences free speech, and shames everything this country should stand for,” Garcia said.

The chairman immediately called for the paper to remove the cartoon from all its platforms, terminate Bok’s contract, and apologize to Kirk’s family and Newsday’s readership.

Bok — who has penned cartoons for the Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Time, and Newsweek — is not employed by Newsday, the outlet told The Post. 

The cartoon that was published was “syndicated,” meaning it was sold to the outlet or borrowed from the artist for publishing.

“Until these actions are taken, we call on advertisers and subscribers to boycott Newsday. Do not support a publication that normalizes hate and endangers lives,” the politician raged.

Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman also rushed to “cancel” Long Island’s daily paper over the “over the top despicable” cartoon.

“The unconscionable cartoon in Newsday trivializing the assassination of Charlie Kirk is so over the top despicable that it is shocking even for the majority of us who realized long ago that Newsday abandoned any pretension of fairness,” the Republican wrote in a Facebook post Saturday.

https://nypost.com/2025/09/14/us-news/newsday-forced-to-apologize-for-vile-charlie-kirk-political-cartoon-after-igniting-call-for-boycott-crossed-a-line/

 

======================

 

 

 

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.