256 Comments
User's avatar
BlackThunder's avatar

Nothing about the official story makes sense.

Thomas A Braun RPh's avatar

A well orchestrated preplanned assassination.

Need a patsy to miss direct. They found one.

Jason's avatar

The entire official story is a coordinated psyop.

All the independent experts have analyzed the evidence and found the motive: stop Kirk from anti-Zionist speech, and the assassins: Netanyahu and his Mossad thugs.

Courageous voices like Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, Michael Yon, ThePeoplesvoice.tv, rense.com, and more have shown us the mainstream media and US Govt is complicit and/or blackmailed to lie to the public. This is Kennedy assassination 102 and Epstein cover-up 103.

CB's avatar

Alex Jones, though reluctant to blame Israel, said yesterday he no longer thinks Robinson was the shooter.

Anna Marie's avatar

DUH. That was obvious from the outset.

CB's avatar
Oct 21Edited

Sure, but Jones was wanting to stick with the establishment, more "comfortable" transtifa theory, so it's good to see him giving it up.

P.S. I should have mentioned that one of the reasons Jones gave for giving up on Robinson as the shooter is the obvious coverup, with some reports, including Jones', suggesting the judge may try to gag as many as 3,000 witnesses, including event attendees and people who had interviewed Kirk.

Tony Glynn's avatar

For those 3,000 witnesses, WE THE PEOPLE are behind You. Please don't let anyone stop You from being a Truth Teller. God loves the Truth Tellers, and WE THE PEOPLE are not getting the Truth.

Anna Marie's avatar

I'm just more surprised that A.Jones would just now be relinquishing his position of support for the Tyler theory. As deeply as AJ goes into researching the establishment, you would think that his critical thinking skills warning bells would immediately clang as soon as he heard them exclaim: "We got 'im!" Unless you see the dude walk up to Charlie, point the gun in his face and pull the trigger, you don't "got 'im." in the space of 33 hours...interesting number. Careful investigation, collects ballistic evidence that may be left at the scene, collects surveillance footage, tapes off the crime scene, interviews many witnesses, including the university staff, performs an autopsy, et cetera! ...before making any DEFINITIVE statement. Maybe ask questions like, why were there no first responders and police there? Why no ambulance standibg by for precaution as was supposed to be, due to the number of attendees? That's just a few of the red flags that come to my mind, nobody, and A.Jones, with his MO and investigative mindset just accepted the official narrative as valid until now? Makes me question him and anyone who would be that willingly blind.

Robert James's avatar

All are compromised!😎

ILoveLiberty's avatar

And where was the blood splatter? None. Not even taking the body away. And why the hand signals by 1. Charlie, then right behind guy, then left behind guy, then blue shirt guy who grabbed the camera. And why was the entire ground......dug up the very next day and relaid the concrete?????

Maha's avatar

Why would Jones want to blame Israel? I thought Kirk was pro-Israel, pro-Zion.

CB's avatar
Oct 22Edited

He doesn't want to blame Israel, because there isn't direct evidence. Many people, however, are pointing to Israel's possible motive, as they'd funded TP/USA, but Kirk was turning on them over Gaza and bullying by Jewish donors, who objected to Tucker Carlson having been invited to speak at TP/USA events. Donors and people adjacent to the donors denied this, but then Candace Owens released text messages in which Kirk said he had to break with Israel over these issues. TP/USA later confirmed those texts were real.

As in any murder investigation, it's normal to "look at" people who had a beef with the victim. Doesn't mean they're guilty, but it's a starting point. Lots of coverage of the issues at Owens' website. I'd never followed Kirk, but it turns out Owens worked for TP/USA for two years, traveling and appearing with Kirk at scores of events, and they remained friends even after Owens' earlier turn against Israel.

Tony Glynn's avatar

Nope, Charlie Kirk was very clear about his distain about being Forced into supporting Israel. He was backing away from the donors that where demanding that Charlie Kirk take the millions being pushed on TPUSA.

Sadly TPUSA is getting caught up in lie after lie.

Mikey and his Daddy the pastor are very deep in Charlie Kirk's the cover-up of the Public Assassination of Charlie.

They wanted the Whole World to see, and SHUT UP.

Sorry Pumpkin, We The People are here to call out the BS. And We The People aren't going anywhere, until We get the Truth.

And thank you TPUSA for showing us the people who are telling Us the Truth. All those who y'all are bashing, are those who are telling Us the Truth.

Keep showing Us the Truth Tellers.

We The People ain't dummies, and We won't be Fooled Again.

Everything done in the dark will be brought to the Light.

Shine Brightly Truth Tellers.

Viva Cristo Rey

Karen McKim-Altman's avatar

Charlie had become quite critical of Israel in the past few months. He was not as 'pro-Israel, pro Zion" as he used to be.

ILoveLiberty's avatar

It is completely fair at this point in history to ask who are the real Jews and who are not? Free pass must end. Woe to those who call themselves Jews and are NOT. Bible.

Nnikk's avatar

And don't leave George Webb off that list.

nancy barker's avatar

Who is George Webb?

Jason's avatar

Thanks! I added him on my Substack list.

Tony Glynn's avatar

George just showed US ALL, that there was preplanned of Something. He was a crisis actor getting paid. But by who was he getting paid?

Someone knew what was going to happen to Charlie Kirk.

Dummies keep blowing their cover every time.

Leslie M's avatar

Do “all the independent experts” have access to all the evidence? How did they get it? Did the FBI turn it over to them? Sorry, but Candace wasn’t even invited to the memorial service, but claims to have all this inside knowledge? Haven’t seen any of the “receipts” she keeps talking about. Sorry, but I’m very skeptical that your claims have been substantiated.

CherylBray's avatar

Invited? Anyone could have gone. That is a silly thing to say.

She and Charlie were still friends. They were in touch. You should see the texts.

She is asking absolutely important questions. She and others are investigating because the narrative does not add up.

If you are not questioning this investigation, my only suggestion is you might need to go get a booster. The government said they're safe and effective.

Leslie M's avatar

She was not an invited guest or speaker. Odd for someone who claims she was one of his closest friends. Of course she could have stood in line for hours to get in. FYI, I was a vax skeptic from the get go…from seeing and listening to real evidence of its harm, not from a bunch of wanna-be influencers pretending they have secret info no one else has…without showing any evidence.

CherylBray's avatar

"Wanna be influencer"? That is quite telling.

What criteria must a person possess for them to become a reputable journalist? Because most of the journalists today are not worth anything.

Candace is asking questions. That's it. But it is clear that only some questions are allowed, not others. She knows this and marches forward anyway.

Leslie M's avatar

Not well known people like Candace, but lots on the fringes…BTW, do you agree with her that “Gaza is the REAL Holocaust”…apparently the one with the Nazis wasn’t real?! I used to like her but she’s gone off the rails on some issues.

CherylBray's avatar

I'm sorry but I try to never comment on supposed quotes from people without the original context as so many people are misquoted or mischaracterized today.

I can say again that I'm not a long-time listener or supporter of Candace...I only started listening right after Charlie's assassination. It sounds like you may be sensitive to Candace's views on Israel and Gaza. I don't know any of the specifics on her views other than she definitely was let go at Daily Wire because she did not agree with the US/Israel/Gaza policies of the Daily Wire.

RE: my own views on Gaza, October 7th and U.S./Israel policy, I read Glenn Greenwald, Max Blumenthal, Dave Smith, John Mearsheimer, Scott Horton, Jeremy Hammond and sometimes Jeffrey Sachs. I especially appreciate independent viewpoints from Historians and Independent Israeli journalists on the ground.

Tony Glynn's avatar

It's very real TODAY. I believe that was her point. If you refuse to see the children being targeted by Israel, shame on you.

As St Mother Teresa said, It's a poverty that a Child must Die, so you can live as you Wish.

We must be better.

CherylBray's avatar

Not odd given what is public knowledge. Candace was outcast due to questions about USA's role with Israel and the Gaza war.

She also publicly questioned all vaccine safety. Both well before Charlie's assassination. This made her persona non grata in many public places.

Turning Point and donors were pro Israel. Both Charlie and Candace acknowledged and worked around this issue privately. Candace was open about paying this cost for her beliefs.

She and Charlie were very much in touch. She brought receipts.

Leslie M's avatar

What “receipts”? (Silly term). I’ve heard her say that but haven’t seen any.

CherylBray's avatar

The assertion that Charlie wasn't friends with Candace, that he wasn't seriously under massive pressure from Israeli donors or that he was about to change his public stance on Israel and the Gaza war are all discussed in a group text chain just a short time before his death (confirmed by Turning Point CEO as true). In the texts, in response to what Charlie felt was egregious daily pressure by donors trying to micromanage his every word, Charlie writes that he'd like to bring Candace back on stage (he'd already brought Tucker Carlson and Dave Smith on stage) and he stated that he could no longer have the same public support for Israel (paraphrased - the texts are public for you to read). Charlie also went on Megan Kelly in the weeks before his assassination discussing this same pressure and possible change of heart.

My comments mainly address Charlie's and Candace's relationship and his changing stance on Israel. For receipts about her investigation into his assassination, you'll have to listen to her podcasts as they are too numerous to mention here. She worked at Turning Point for years, then the Daily Wire, then as an independent journalist. She has a lot of contacts that provide her information. I will just say that at no time does she assert that Israel, Mossad, the CIA or Erika Kirk were at fault for Charlie Kirk's assassination. She is doing this independent investigation because the "math aint mathin", as my son says and because she and Charlie Kirk were very dear friends.

She has not stated any conclusions. It is people mischaracterizing her statements on this investigation and/or people who don't like that she questions the USA's relationship to Israel and vaccines that have made her a target.

I did not watch her show before the Charlie Kirk assassination, simply because I'm more inclined to more independent scientific or political journalism (Matt Taibbi, Glenn Greenwald, Focal Points, Highwire) but of course I knew who she was. I definitely understand that her style is very conversational and doesn't appear as rigorous and data driven as most of the more well-known journalists mentioned above. But don't let her approach style make you think there's no substance. She's smart as a whip and very well researched.

We'll see where this all goes. If history holds constant, they (whoever they are) will likely get away with this and maybe we'll find out the full truth 50 to 100 years from now.

Tony Glynn's avatar

Then you are a troll, and you haven't watched anything Candace Owens is putting out.

If she wasn't backing everything up, I don't believe that she would be getting millions and millions of views on her Bonified Work.

You, you are doing nothing.

Be gone now BOT TROLL.

Thank you

Jason's avatar

Being skeptical is fine, when evidence is inconsistent with other sources or does not make sense. What specific investigative journalists do you trust in the Kirk assassination?

Who do you think did it and why?

Robert James's avatar

Clearly psyop...Mossad/CIA...Charlie was backing away from the whole Isis-Ra-Elohim thing...he knew the risk...I believe Candace when she said he came to her and said: 'I was betrayed.' Erika involved, somehow!😎

Eddie Ross's avatar

Going out and making outrageous accusations with no evidence is not being skeptical, it’s presumption and assumption wrapped up in innuendo. If it is “clearly psyop”, do you think people capable of pulling that off wouldn’t leave multiple paths pointing towards others? Being able to recognize a false narrative doesn’t mean you have what really happened in hand.

Tony Glynn's avatar

Candace Owens is a Truth Teller, and there's nothing that's going to stop her.

She's on a mission from God.

No turning back, no turning back.

You obviously haven't watched anything Candace Owens is putting out. She has the receipts for everything that she is bringing out into the open.

Too much cover-up, and it's the cover-up that will always get them.

Even though the Public murder of Charlie Kirk was horrible, those who are covering it up are just Bad, and Evil.

They will be KNOWN as Traders to Humanity.

Karen McKim-Altman's avatar

She was not invited to be a spearker, but she obviously could have attended the memorial service.

Robert James's avatar

More than one assailant! At least two. Mossad/Erika/CIA...Trump glossed it over...👹

Leslie M's avatar

Anyone who lumps Erika in with the Mossad and the CIA is not playing with a full deck. That is a slanderous accusation to make. You should be ashamed.

Tony Glynn's avatar

And don't forget about the Egyptian military squad that came in a day or two earlier, but not all of them, got back on the same military plane.

There's way too much cover-up.

Leslie M's avatar

You know this how, exactly? Candace said so? So the Egyptians are working with Mossad now? Yeah that makes sense…

Tony Glynn's avatar

I have found that those who do their own research, are just cooler people.

If you took the time to watch her talk, you would know better.

She never said that.

You can do better.

I can do better.

Leslie M's avatar

Sure. I’m a troll. 🙄 So, the fact she gets millions of views means whatever she says is the truth? No proof, no evidence, just lots of “my sources tell me…” Millions witnessed the atrocities of the Holocaust too, but Candace now tells us it didn’t happen, and “Gaza is the “real Holocaust”. You all want to just accept whatever she says uncritically, go right ahead. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Thomas A Braun RPh's avatar

When his organization was offered 150 million to be friendly to Israel, which was really tax payer money given to Israel, it makes sense that he had to go.

William Whitten's avatar

A miracle?!?!?! Bullshit! A 30-06 bullet hitting Charlie Kirk in the neck would have literally blown his head off. It is not a "miracle" it is a fucking lie being told by Kash Patel and the Trump regime. These crooks are just as disingenuous as the Biden crime family. I am righteously pissed off because I voted for these motherfuckers.

I am totally fed up with Trump's ultra-Zionism and his promoting the genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza. I relinquish my support of these fucking ghouls.

\\][//

Eric Jason's avatar

Absofugginlutely I feel the same. Utter & complete bullshit the story they’re tryin 2 tell. A 30-06 round at that distance would’ve taken his head completely off & would’ve kept going until it struck a solid object. Not a single fuckin chance in hell his neck stopped that size of round at that close of a distance. They’re all bullshitting & gaslighting everyone except the internet is forever & there’s way 2 many people digging deep & their story is rapidly falling apart.

Jason's avatar

Shifty eyes Patel has been compromised.

M. Dowrick's avatar

With you 100%. Must ask, what does bibi have on trump?

William Whitten's avatar

"what does bibi have on trump?"~M. Dowrick

Nothing, they are both just flaming Zionist fanatics.

\\][//

Robert James's avatar

What indeed? Just threatening to wipe his family out would be enough...even for DJT!😎

Robert James's avatar

Too late...no other choices given...controlled psyops all the way around!

I am not my body, I am free...I remain as God created me...Spiritual consciousness!😎

Mary Walker's avatar

lol. 30.06??? Show us the bullet.

CB's avatar

We notice that the unnamed surgeon didn't state the caliber of the bullet. But oddly, we know the names of the surgeons at Timpanogos Regional Hospital because IP addresses in DC and Israel were searching on the hospital, its surgeons, and even Tyler Robinson during a two-week period back in July (https://www.youtube.com/@realbaronpodcast). It's like someone could envision the future.

Drew Skonberg,DC's avatar

No one should believe this nonsense of a bullet not going thru his cervical spine and exiting.

John Guy's avatar

Former Green Beret and citizen journalist Nate Cornacchia breaks down three major anomalies that 100% throw the official Charlie Kirk assassination narrative into question.

Is Charlie Kirks shooting just theater?

Investigators ask, why is there no visible blood at the scene of Charlie Kirk's assassination?

1. There should have been blood everywhere, no one tried to stop the bleeding. Their hands had zero blood on them. No one tried to save his life?

Carotid arteries are blood vessels supplying blood to the brain, face, and neck, sending oxygen-rich blood to the brain and other parts of the head and neck.

The coronary arteries wrap around the entire heart. The two main branches are the left coronary artery and right coronary artery.

"Apply direct, firm pressure to the wound using a sterile bandage or clean cloth. Use the heel of your hand to press down as hard as you can. Do not lift the cloth to check the wound; if blood soaks through, add more gauze or cloth on top and continue pressing."

https://banned.video/watch?id=68e0420ab357a70c7e7b7ebc

We still have seen any CCTV from the Hospital of Mr. Kirk being pushed or carried in the ER. Have you located any?

Shocking footage emerges: CHARLIE KIRK’S BODY rushed to hospital. No footage of Mr. Kirk at the hospital.

Why?

No blood on the ground or on the hands. There is no image of BleedStop being applied to Mr. Kirk’s neck. Not sure you could stop the bleeding Not even Mfr. Kirks white tennis shoes have any blood on them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HZEGplwWRw

“Yes, a person can bleed when they have been shot and killed. The extent of bleeding depends on the severity of the injury, the type of bullet, and the location of the shot. In cases of severe arterial wounds, a person could bleed out in as little as three minutes if the bullet hits an artery. Prompt medical attention is crucial to manage bleeding and prevent further complications.”

https://www.calendar-canada.ca/frequently-asked-questions/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-gunshot-wou

Eric Jason's avatar

Those are the questions that need answers. Where was all the blood that should’ve sprayed everywhere & everything. Zero blood on any of the people around Charlie & none of them actively trying to stop the bleeding nor where any chest compressions being attempted. They were just handing things off 2 other people. Where is all the footage as you indicated… where’s the footage from the tpu staff.

Peter Sawchuk's avatar

I have shot many animals in the head or neck over the more than fifty years I have been hunting. A high vel. round would have caused a catastrophic wound and a veritable fountain of blood. Brain death would have been virtually instantaneous but his heart would most likely keep beating for a time pumping blood everywhere. IMO the most likely scenario is a low velocity round fired from much closer.

currer's avatar

Yes, I believe it is a psyop. And they are telling us.

The book that was published on Amazon before Kirk was "shot" was by "Anastasia J Casey" - One case of resurrection.

Anyone here do crosswords?

Anastasia means resurrection in Greek, J is used as a i in Latin, (number one) Case...(y)

https://web.archive.org/web/20250911163616/https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FQMF466K

While the book was briefly available on Amazon The original link has been erased so here is another.

https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2025/09/fact-check-the-shooting-of-charlie-kirk-book-was-not-published-by-anastasia-j-casey-before-kirk-shooting.html

John Guy's avatar

Charlie Kirk's assassination was on September 10th. A man named Tyler was arrested as the suspected shooter. The opening scene of the 1998 film Snake Eyes takes place on September 10th at a sports arena where a boxer named Tyler is fighting. Tyler's nickname is the executioner. During the fight, a man named Charles Kirkland is shot in the neck.

My lucky number... What?

https://gregreese.substack.com/p/magikal-spells-for-the-masses?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=706779&post_id=174553045&utm_campaign=email-play-on-substack&utm_content=watch_now_button&r=smi2v&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

John Guy's avatar

ISRAEL'S CHIEF RABBI wrote a condolence letter about CHARLIE KIRK'S DEATH on September 2nd, 8 days BEFORE THE ASSASSINATION.

The Hebrew calendar date 9 Elul, 5785 corresponds with September 2, 2025. The letter is still LIVE on the Israel Heritage Foundation (

@IHF_Heritage) X account.

https://x.com/jacksonhinklle/status/1968221132588257543

**************

NYT & LA Times Reported Charlie Kirk Being Shot On Sept. 9th- The Day Before His Assassination! PLUS, Amazon Books Had “The Shooting Of Charlie Kirk” Posted 1 Day Before His Murder

https://banned.video/watch?id=68c30d69bbd81cebcbdc766f

Anastasia J. Casey's The Shooting Of Charlie Kirk book gets published a day before Trump ally's killing. Full controversy explained

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/anastasia-j-caseys-the-shooting-of-charlie-kirk-book-gets-published-a-day-before-trump-allys-killing-full-controversy-explained/ar-AA1MrGWR

Robert James's avatar

Sloppy psyops!🤪 They just don't care to hide it anymore...obfuscated but not hidden!😎

Michael Jenkins's avatar

Nothing @IHF_Heritage for Sept 2. Has it been [Re]moved????

Aly Jaenicke's avatar

A relative of mine who is a green beret also said the same thing.

Everyone is lying, will we ever know why..

Robert James's avatar

They have different tech, projectiles, delivery systems, etc. At least 2 assassins.😎

Dan Star's avatar

If you watch the full video, shortly after the bullet pierces his neck skin blood comes pouring out. He was dead by then since blood pressure would drop precipitously.

John Guy's avatar

“Yes, a person can bleed when they have been shot and killed. The extent of bleeding depends on the severity of the injury, the type of bullet, and the location of the shot. In cases of severe arterial wounds, a person could bleed out in as little as three minutes if the bullet hits an artery. Prompt medical attention is crucial to manage bleeding and prevent further complications.”

https://www.calendar-canada.ca/frequently-asked-questions/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-gunshot-wound-to-bleed

Nadine A White's avatar

Wouldn't it be nice if for once we weren't lied to?

Steve. S's avatar

Too much money and power on the line to be truthful with the lowly citizens.

Robert James's avatar

Make Lying Wrong Again!😎

DS's avatar

For comparison, I recently shot a 120 lb boar with a similar sized bullet from only about 50 yards away, and to my amazement the round lodged in its shoulder. It passed through a lot of soft material before hitting the shoulder/scapula region, which is not very dense bone. Boars also have super thick skin, almost plate-like around their shoulders, which helped stop the bullet, too. So no exit wound from 50 yards, and the hog just tipped over in place, it didn't go flying a dozen feet like John makes it sound like should have happened. All that to say, it's good to ask questions! I'm just saying if the "physics doesn't match up" with Charlie Kirk's tragic murder, it doesn't necessarily match up with the boar I shot, either, or the whole situation is a little more complex from a physics standpoint than we are realizing.

John Leake's avatar

The boar's body absorbed the energy of the bullet, certainly massive internal damage, thorax of large wild boar not comparable to human neck.

DS's avatar

Agreed sir, definitely some differences in energy absorption. 10-15% more ft-lb at closer range was my point, I was surprised it didn't pass through. LH's comment above has me curious as to whether Kirk's assassin used a factory loaded round. Or maybe a heavier, subsonic factory round so it dropped more than expected and hit neck instead of head. Or hand loaded improperly so had slower muzzle velocity and greater drop than expected for that distance. The whole "neck shot" thing seems weird, it's a smaller target, so why purposely aim there?

Robert James's avatar

Think outside the box...maybe 'air arms' instead of 'fire arms'.😎

Michael Srite's avatar

"It wasn't a bullet that laid him to rest, was the Low Spark of High Heeled Boys." --Steve Winwood, 1971

Peter Sawchuk's avatar

The problem with an underloaded handload would be inconsistent ignition which would most likely negatively affect accuracy. It is also highly unlikely the bullet would "blow his head off." A properly loaded round would definitely create tremendous damage and it is unlikely that it wouldn't go clean through. From the video I saw it appeared to me that he was shot through the right side of his neck with the projectile stopping just under the skin on the left side of his neck. This is not consistent with where they claim the shooter was positioned.

Lauren Hattem's avatar

Except it is because a distance test was done and it did measure out to be where the accused shooter was

Lauren Hattem's avatar

They did a distance test by using the sound btw

Peter Sawchuk's avatar

According to what I saw on the video and in pictures and diagrams the shooter was almost directly in front of him. If anything he was slightly to Charlie's left. This defies everything I have learned about ballistics and bullet properties in over forty years of handloading. I honestly think there is strong reason to believe the bullet was not fired from the "official" position. I once shot a deer that was facing me peaking under a tree branch. Although not a shot I would normally take as it was toward the end of the season I decided it was now or never. I later recovered that bullet laying just under the hide in the hind quarter. That bullet broke bones as well. A human neck would not have stopped that bullet from exiting. It had travelled a good 36 to 40 inches through flesh and bone. Draw your own conclusions.

Michael Srite's avatar

According to the official story of the Martin Luther King assassination and the trial of James Earl Ray, MLK was shot with a 30:06 bullet. The bullet was recovered from his body and forensically linked to a rifle associated with Mr. Ray.

Lauren Hattem's avatar

Totally. I saw several tests of the gun and bullet type used and as you said, doesn’t always happen the same each event! Or he could have loaded wrong with a less amount of ammo which could have lessened the hit. But it happened and all the speculation can’t change his assassination

Rosalyn Jenkins's avatar

I recently discovered that it's possible to load that size shell with less ammo to make it stop inside the body and not exit at all. I was told it's standard knowledge for hired assassins. It was a trick our own soldiers used in WWII to insure the enemy would fall down dead where they stood and not survive the shot any time at all.

Randall Stoehr's avatar

On the theater of battle, the wounded are the greater newest liability.

Aid must be attempted. The dead are left till a more convenient time.

The wounded require more men that could have been used in active combat

It was not uncommon for instructions to wound rather than eliminate totally.

On both sides.

Michael Jenkins's avatar

The bullet is just one aspect of this whole bogus story.

DS's avatar

Loading wrong kinda makes sense. Seems weird that he did a "neck shot" instead of head shot, but if round wasn't loaded correctly, it would drop more over that distance, thus a neck instead of head shot.

CB's avatar

Caliber? Bullet weight and type? Depth of penetration? The authorities haven't disclosed the bullet weight and type, but they should have.

pretty-red, old guy's avatar

Very important and easy to determine. Since the bullet did not exit, all the lead could have been recovered and at minimum weighed to determine if it was a potential 30-06 lead bullet. No one has seen any results of such, from what I can tell.

IF caliber can be assured, it seems the next thing is determine if forensics prove it came from Robinson's rifle. If caliber is determined can the lead material itself be found to be the same as the other rounds found with the weapon?

These simple answers are required to determine most of the rest.

Of course, the world would love to see the X ray of Charlie's neck!

Lauren Hattem's avatar

I think most of these things ie bullet size, weight and type will be shown at trial. Doubtful we’ll hear anything about “evidence” prior to that. They don’t want to reveal anything that could damage the case. We definitely don’t want this thrown out in a technicality

Robert James's avatar

They had to keep it low key...2 shooters...one above-behind, one to the side, different technologies, maybe even powerful air rifle or other quiet projectile launcher.😎

Christy's avatar

it was all planned and set up. The kid is the fall guy, he wasn't even capable of shooting that well. Someone else, a trained assassin, shot Charlie. We all know that something is going on, facts point to people wanting him out of the way. He was "getting in the way". Too influential. I think about people that were evangelical preachers in the 60s, no one would have ever targeted them for spreading the will and word of god. We live in an insane time. I have lost all trust in anything that has to do with government, police, CIA, FBI, CDC WHO, you name it.. All, corrupt.

RoseMartyn's avatar

As far as corruption, please add the schools, hospitals, and most doctors. Oh and many of the churches.

Christy's avatar

bad business starts at the top and filters down; at 70, I feel betrayed by all of the administrations, all who are supposed to "represent us" and am wary of anything in big industry, anything that comes out of our medical monster industry, and everything "global". What a crock. We have been sold to the highest bidder. Cannon fodder.

Steve. S's avatar

Another inside job….

Nancy M's avatar

I completely agree with your analysis John!! I really do suspect foul play here and what has been reported so far in the main stream media makes no sense at all!

Kathleen Taylor's avatar

Quoting for emphasis what I consider the most important takeaway from this article:

"[...] (S)o many of us no longer trust our federal and state authorities to tell us the truth.

For example, we have strong grounds for suspecting that medical examiners are not diligently investigating (with the proper analytic methods) unexpected, fatal cardiac arrests in young people to determine if they were caused by vaccine-induced myocarditis."

Marge's avatar

Tucker Carlson revealed the original coroner report stated Floyd’s death was due to a drug overdose not asphyxiation. I believe that given Floyd’s preexisting heart condition and the list of drugs he ingested as well as his drug use and criminal record yet an innocent police officer remains in jail

Jennifer Jones's avatar

I wouldn't say he was innocent of everything he did, I mean a leg on my neck would kill me. Just sayin'

Marge's avatar

Police restraint training includes exactly what the officer used to subdue Floyd. The coroner found no bruising and no medical evidence that the pressure applied to Floyd’s neck cause asphyxiation. Lab tests proved beyond a doubt that Floyd died of an overdose. Tucker Carlson’s report might still be found on the internet. He has also addressed this evil cover up on his network. The police officer is completely innocent and the evidence has been completely ignored because of political corruption

Koo's avatar

John Leake! YOU are the perfect investigative crime reporter to get to the bottom of this assassination. The public and his family deserve to know the truth!

Stephanie Hart's avatar

I don’t think his family (wife, new CEO🙄) or the TP staff want the truth! No grief, just let’s move on…

Deborah's avatar

They know the truth, that's why the acting is so horrible and unnatural.

Charles E Robacker's avatar

I am confused. Why would one need a surgeon for someone that was killed instantly? Please inform me about this. Now, I also have a few other questions. The Zapruder film of the JFK assassination is now viewable online. It plainly shows that his head snaps backward and to the left which means that the kill shot came from the front and right. My question is what happened to all the other film of the JFK assassination that the FBI confiscated? Next, why aren't any of the so-called conservative media stars not saying anything about the anomalous actions of the Kirk assassination? For my last question to Mark Levine, Bill O'Reilly, Clay and Buck, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck; Why aren't any of you talking about the greatest crime perpetrated upon the world? Namely, the infection of about 5,500,000,000 people worldwide with the covid shots.

Robert James's avatar

Watch "Everything Is A Rich Man's Trick" on YT 3+ hours!😎

Nicky Gardner's avatar

It seems perfectly simple to me. Authorities have lost the public trust because they're not trustworthy, period. No level of government in ANY country that I know of is populated with anything but self serving liars bought and paid for by the medical/industrial complex, which gives rise to the urgent question ... How do we replace them? Where do we find qualified people of integrity in our world? Like searching for the proverbial needle.

Jennifer Jones's avatar

The scary question we might want to ask ourselves is, "What if there never was an 'in the past'?" IOW, we say "things are changing and are different and we can't trust anymore", but that assumes we used to be able to trust, that assumes that "things were different" "back when." We sayn well the JFK assassination was the watershed moment when some in our country shot our President, but we seem to assume that nothing like that happened before because, well, after all, JFK was a Maverick, he was threatening the CIA (which he was) or such and such country was threated by what was doing. We speak of that as when we first opened our eyes to see what happened. What if things were never different "back then" like we thought? I think of the 60s growing up playing in the neighborhood as being different back then. So, maybe it just seems that way.

Nicky Gardner's avatar

Unfortunately you're right. It just seems that way. I grew up in the 50s and I clearly remember for example my mother's warnings about never talking to strangers, don't take candy from strangers, etc. I also remember my parents' vocal disgust with elected officials on various and sundry issues. The war (WWII) pretty much destroyed any faith they had in officialdom. Fortunately for me, I was inculcated with a healthy dose of scepticism at an early age.

joseph orban,jr's avatar

I’m still waiting for the evidence on the shooter in butler pa. It seems all the evidence went Poof.