Charlie Kirk is dead... A sad day in history

Whatever it was (in a way, said messages were alleged statement - by gunman perpetrator and lover witness), it was a strange, there were many 'I's, and daresay a staged back and forth in what others have pointed out, until proven otherwise (IMO).

This brief exchange was somewhat odd, and don't think it was specifically mentioned:

Roommate: (establishing premeditation with a capital P) "How long have you been planning this?
Robinson: A bit over a week I believe. ...

The roommates statement is placed as a question (allegedly by text message.) and lays down the path of intent. Was it spur of the moment or planned. Planning and plotting by the lone gunman is a valuable script, yet here at this point it is sketchy in terms of aloneness doing the crime.

As for Robinson, right, hmm (and could be wrong), it was not 'maybe a week.' Not 'about a week,' or 'over a week,' it was "a [bit] over a week [I believe].' Do you believe it? The exchange seems to need/want people to believe it, and it needed to be reinforce, 'a bit.'

It would be interesting to hear what the witness statement analyst, Peter Hyatt would have to say on the whole exchange (he was the guy who assessed the statements of the McCanne's back in time).



That is a good point, it would be impossible to preform CPR without removing, although as Beau said, he may have forgotten. It also makes me think that if they had removed it, it may not have have been easy - would that have been remarked upon?

Suppose, those close to Kirk in the know eventually will end up addressing this. The FBI sure is not.
I don't know how one could do CPR in a back seat with so many people in that car. You ideally need a firm surface and some space to maneuver. But with enough adrenaline, I guess anything is possible. They say most modern cars have lots of cameras...
 
Jimmy Kimmle is a left wing late night show host , he got fired over the following statement, the main part:



I'm curious to see what people think about this.


Is this "celebrating" or a fair assesment and valid opinion.

His joke revolved more around Trump than Charlie but still the quoted segment above is the part that people are bringing up.

Kimmle was a diabolical puppet during covid, so i have no sympathy for him whatsoever and probably deserves jail over it, but is this a bit of a double edge sword?
The show ratings had been bad for a while. Just needing an excuse to fire him in this latest wave of outrage is most likely.
 
Jimmy Kimmle is a left wing late night show host , he got fired over the following statement, the main part:



I'm curious to see what people think about this.


Is this "celebrating" or a fair assesment and valid opinion.

His joke revolved more around Trump than Charlie but still the quoted segment above is the part that people are bringing up.

Kimmle was a diabolical puppet during covid, so i have no sympathy for him whatsoever and probably deserves jail over it, but is this a bit of a double edge sword?


The show ratings had been bad for a while. Just needing an excuse to fire him in this latest wave of outrage is most likely.

Obviously I‘m not sad at all that Kimmle was fired, in fact, I feel pretty much the opposite that could be described as “thank god, finally!“.

When it comes to free speech I think the following guy makes a very important point that many seem to miss in that debate (while I‘m hesitant towards some of the other things he is saying). There is something that is called objective reality, basic decency and goodness, and the opposite of that, And pretending that you can judge every speech without those basic criteria’s is kind of crazy :

 
Last edited:
Posting this here, as part of the larger line of force that seems to run through the whole situation.
X and probably other platforms are already using an AI to block/de-boost posts the AI considers antisemitic.
And from what Bret says, this could be applied at larger scale the same way COVID misinformation and disinformation where applied, an ‘antisemitic public emergency’.
 
A few of those stand out, but the bug/drone example beginning at 09:43 is most interesting.
All of those look like bugs to me, excepting the one shown at 9:15 (timestamp in the source footage). That looks slightly more unusual, but given the context of how many bugs were flying around in all the other footage and how the speed and trajectory seems to match those, my thoughts are that it's likely another bug, just at an angle that makes it seem slightly more 'drone like'.

he see a lot of drone on the film he received and got a pretty good still of one of them. At 1:01:47 is the picture of the drone. Video is at the rigth time bellow
It's actually about ten minutes earlier than that, and the still he posted is from one of the bugs' flight path. The rooftop footage does make it pretty clear, however, that whoever was on the roof did not stop to disassemble the rifle before leaving the area. So the screwdriver was either planted evidence, or used to assemble the rifle prior to any shot.

The idea that Kirk was intended to be shot but not killed doesn't make much sense to me. Assuming he had the capability of shooting accurately enough, why would a 'lone wolf' shooter with an alleged grudge against Kirk do that, and when a missed shot would have been just as effective for 'sending a message'? Especially if the shooter couldn't have known in advance if Kirk would be wearing body armour or not. On the other hand, a professional might have been able to glean that information through insider sources, but then why would any conspirators go to the trouble of 'shooting to wound' and burning a useful 'patsy' asset when doing so, when a death would have had more political impact, or again, a warning shot and 'clean getaway' would have accomplished much the same thing? Plus, with the risk that it might have only strengthened Kirk's resolve and caused him to 'double down' on speaking the truth?

No, it seems much more likely to me that the kill shot, by whichever perpetrator, was taken quite deliberately.
 
Obviously I‘m not sad at all that Kimmle was fired, in fact, I feel pretty much the opposite that could be described as “thank god, finally!“.

When it comes to free speech I think the following guy makes a very important point that many seem to miss in that debate (while I‘m hesitant towards some of the other things he is saying). There is something that is called objective reality, basic decency and goodness, and the opposite of that, And pretending that you can judge every speech without those basic criteria’s is kind of crazy :

I see that, only thing with Kimmle ( who i could not care less ) is that his commentary is more of an observation. AKA trying to score political points but he himself engaging in the same by framing the right.
If anything his comment on Trump are most insensitive part of his routine. Not the veiled acusation.

Are we making a mistake?

I want all these gremlins out idealy in the best way, but if this type of mistake backfires and is used to nomalize persecution, i don't think we are in a better position.

Bondi, IMMEDIATELY rushed to score a point for antisemetic "hate speech" you can see all these hyneas salivating at the oportunity to capitalize on the tragedy.
 
Charlie Kirk’s wife, Erika, has taken over as the new CEO of Turning Point USA. Let's see if she really carries on his alleged legacy.

View attachment 112049

That could get interesting:

Firstly because of what Erika said in her memorial of Kirk shortly after he was killed, pretty much giving the impression to not let his legacy die and bring those who did it to justice. Secondly, because Kirk himself described her as much more conservative and far less moderate, here:


And thirdly because the people close to Kirk and his show said that Erika said “she knows everything“ after she got a call after the assassination where somebody “very important“ asked her “how much do you know?“ and that Kirk told them if anything ever happened to him that Erika should head TPUSA:


And Candace keeps saying that only her husband and Erika would currently have the power to make her consider stopping or calming down her research.

Edit: Inserted the following: where somebody “very important“
 
Last edited:
Pretty level-headed video for the most part from another sniper. I remember this guy from the video he did on Butler last year:

Some notes in [brackets]:

Yeah, good one. I don't really get the necklace explanation though. Can't see what would have caused it to move up if it was a clean shot to the neck well above the necklace.
 
Look at this still image from Robinson on the roof lowering his "hoodie" before jumping. The hoodie make a straight horizontal line. Something obviously solid and straight like maybe a riffle. Still image 3:56 and see the hoodie.

 
I think there is the possibility that part of the initial plan was to take over TPUSA after Kirk died by implanting a (possibly pro Israel) shill there. But the public backlash might have made that a bit untenable and I think especially Candace reaction in that regard because she very vocally, forcefully and publicly threatened those responsible for TPUSA and “near to Kirk“ that she will go full bore and expose everyone and everything involved should they install a shill in Kirks place. Given that and what I posted in my last post above I think it is reasonable to think that Erika is now leading that organization wasn’t what they wanted to happen. And that Candace is probably one of the primary players that made this possible.
 
Last edited:
I think there is the possibility that part of the initial plan was to take over TPUSA after Kirk died by implanting a (possibly pro Israel) shill there. But the public backlash might have made that a bit untenable and I think especially Candace reaction in that regard because she very vocally, forcefully and publicly threatened those responsible for TPUSA and “near to Kirk“ that she will go full bore and expose everyone and everything involved should they install a shill in Kirks place. Given that and what I posted in my last post above I think it is reasonable to think that Erika is now leading that organization wasn’t what they wanted to happen. And that Candace is probably one of the primary players that made this possible.

I can’t find any materials that would reveal Erika’s stance on Israel. We know that Charlie’s stance was recently shifting towards a more objective view and I find that rather suspicious that he was taken out amidst that shift. I also struggle to believe that this shift had absolutely nothing to do with his murder. Being close friends with Candace means that he was exposed to non-biblical and more objective view of Israel and who knows what effect it had on his views. Especially when combined with the bullying from the pro-Israel lobby he’d been experiencing recently.
 
X and probably other platforms are already using an AI to block/de-boost posts the AI considers antisemitic.

And so, just another way to reestablish censorship. Words of wisdom from perhaps the best of the Founding Fathers:

“The greatest tyrannies are always perpetuated in the name of the noblest causes.” -- Thomas Paine

The show ratings had been bad for a while. Just needing an excuse to fire him in this latest wave of outrage is most likely.

Just like with Colbert, Kimmel's show simply wasn't profitable anymore, his woke, anti-Trump/MAGA "comedy" was wearing thin, and his offensive and untrue remarks concerning Kirk's assassin provided the opportunity to take his show off the air. What hasn't been posted yet, was his follow up remark about Trump:
"We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA [Make America Great Again] gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them," Kimmel said. The late-night host also took a swipe at President Donald Trump, deriding the chief executive's public mourning of Kirk as akin to "how a four-year-old mourns a goldfish."

The pendulum is obviously swinging back the other way in regards to public discourse that occurs primarily through social media. Unfortunately, the opportunity to go too far with condemning supposed hate speech, cancelling, and other free speech constitutional rights is becoming quite apparent - and dangerous. I do agree with Matt Walsh's take as previously posted:

It behooves us to carefully watch everything taking place as our rights and freedoms continue to be in jeopardy by the usual suspects - the wolves in sheep's clothing.
 
Back
Top Bottom