There are so many lies out there these days it has gotten to the point where no one can tell what’s real and what isn’t, especially with the advent of AI and the things they can do with computer-generated graphics. We have to pretty much rely on our gut instincts and whatever rudimentary knowledge of right and wrong that we’ve been blessed with to try and figure out the truth in most narratives and/or situations. It’s always good to be able to see and understand motives too.
One of the instances that stands out to me is the Charlie Kirk assassination. To begin with, in order to determine the truth, you almost have to discount everything that is being said – especially in the mainstream media. Everything. Fairly reliable word has it that he is actually dead, so maybe folks can avoid the rabbit hole that doubt of that would lead you into, so assuming he is, I wonder if there are still folks that buy into the narrative that the “shooter” was that young fellow they keep pointing to – Tyler Robinson. That narrative has been so thoroughly debunked by now that I think even I could successfully defend him in court, so why did they try to cook up something so flimsy? Complete with texts so blatantly filled with admissions of guilt nonsense as to be laughable, and those sprang up immediately revealing that the narrative was almost as preplanned as some outlandish story of nineteen nomadic tribesmen flying passenger jets, but that’s another story.
There are some fairly plausible motivations for someone(s) wanting to shut him up and they should be explored. He had reached a stage of his evolution as a presenter where he might have been onto the fact that he was being used to promote things he didn’t necessarily believe in. Apparently, he had enough integrity to refuse to do so. He was becoming vocal about the things he was being asked to do and say and it seemingly became necessary to quieten him. As to the methodology that was used to do so, well it just looks like the perpetrators are getting sloppy.
There were more than enough folks filming him when it happened that it looks like some of the extant videos got out ahead of the narrative, or maybe the narrative has had to become obviously fluid in order to compensate for the many visuals that continue to contradict it. One of the first videos I watched of the event showed an ear bud flying out of Charlie’s ear, the narrator acknowledged seeing it but attempted to explain it as having been ejected due to the tremendous force on the bullet-induced pressure. I plainly saw this and the narrator even made those comments. The earpiece came out with such force that the wire connected to it strained the fabric of his shirt into what resembled a tent over his chest – only for a fraction of a second. The reason I mention this is that some very sloppy cover-up videos have surfaced claiming that Charlie wasn’t wearing an earpiece, advertising themselves as “brand new 4K videos that haven’t been shown yet” and in those new and improved 4K videos, they show a profile of Charlie’s face and head with no earpiece and oddly the narrator of this video goes to the trouble of pointing this out and saying several times that there is no earpiece. So now they are taking pains to claim that we should just ignore what our eyes saw – a clearly visible earpiece flying out of his head – and believe the new 4K videos.
Since there was no “exit wound”, some “doctor” who supposedly examined the body claimed – and this was the best he could come up with – that Charlie was some kind of man of steel, because his body stopped the bullet and there was no exit wound. I’m an experienced hunter and have shot several deer in my time, some with a 30-06, the type of rifle they are trying to claim he was shot with, and I can assure anyone that even a (light) 170 grain 30-06 bullet would have passed through a human body no matter where it hit. A 30-06 can shoot completely through a moose! Someone needs to work on their false-narrative creation skills.
I believe the reason there was no exit wound was that the earpiece Charlie was using was what killed him. It had been rigged with an explosive charge. It wouldn’t have needed to be much, after all the ear canal doesn’t pose much obstruction to the brain. This would fit perfectly with the “no exit wound”. Whatever charge used would have diffused and/or disintegrated inside the skull. It would also explain the lack of blood as the charge would most likely have cauterized the inner ear area from the heat produced. There are people in the world with a proven record of booby-trapping communications devices, and this theory would also explain the instantaneous digging up the turf and paving it – just so no private investigator might come along and find plastic shards with embedded explosive residue. Why else would decide – on the spur of the moment – to remove any evidence at the scene? There were a bunch of “security” guys swarming all over the limp body of Charlie. I think they were removing anything from the scene that could have given the plot away.
Another advantage of using a remote-controlled explosive device would be that in case it failed to work, no one would be the wiser or even notice it had been attempted, unlike a missed gunshot where there would be an investigation, or failed bomb explosion or other kinds of attempts that would be obvious.
Why was there plain video of someone jumping off the roof of the building? There’s no way that character could have had a rifle on his person, broken down or otherwise. The official narrative is that the “suspect” had that rifle with or on him when he jumped. The texts to his “lover” are obviously fake as they contain so many iterations of “I did it” to the extent it’s laughable. Why did all the actors jump into the scene, removing cameras, cards, etc.? This was a crime scene and should have been roped off undisturbed and if all those fellows pulled that without pre-authorization (from someone(s) with a lot of stroke in high places), someone would have gone to jail. Nothing like that happened and this whole thing stinks to high heaven. I didn’t see anyone trying to do CPR – all those guys (who looked for the world like intel spooks) were all busy doing something though. Why did a bunch of fellows carry his body to a waiting SUV and speed off? If he had been shot with a high-powered rifle, there would have been blood everywhere, but if you watch the video of them loading him into the vehicle, you’ll see there was little to none. In real life there would have been an ambulance with EMTs, even if he was deceased. The speed at which the narrative was generated, the suspect identified, any possible evidence obliterated, reminds one of the pre-crafted narrative we were served on 9/11 where even the scrap metal got shipped to China quickly. It’s like the script was already written out just waiting for the event to happen.
Anyways, I hope they are able to solve this despicable act, but I fear that like so many other crimes in this nation, a proper investigation won’t be allowed by the perpetrators. Perpetrators with a penchant for disallowing proper investigations. Also keep in mind that this post is just my own opinion – some fairly solid evidence for it if all the original videos are still available, but still just my opinion.
Keep an eye on this one. The truth may come out on this side, but if not, it will come out on the other – they won’t escape God’s justice.
MK



