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

[mabar]

wiw , my impression is that it´s so ( not fake ) , prior to the assassination the conspirators would of course do prep work for the event , though why leave public clues is somewhat puzzling , maybe chalk it up to wishful thinking perhaps.

Fake or not reinforced the narrative of one or shooter or the shooter.

 

[Ricardo]

Fake or not reinforced the narrative of one or shooter or the shooter.

( you´re not being clear ) The web searches came from Washington DC and Tel Aviv iirc prior to the assassination , so no ?

 

[Ruth]

There is a good chance that these are photoshopped images of Google Trends and that these searches never happened. Are there videos of people actually typing these search terms in Google Trends and getting these results?

It also does not make much sense for a lot of people to search for "Charlie Kirk Tylor Robinson" in advance since the two had no connection whatsoever.

I believe there are, but they were 'wiped' when other people tried to do it. And as far as searching for these things 'in advance', it only makes sense if you are one of the conspirators and you were in the stage of planning the event. Why else would they do it?

 

[Ruth]

fwiw , my impression is that it´s so ( not fake ) , prior to the assassination the conspirators would of course do prep work for the event , though why leave public clues is somewhat puzzling , maybe chalk it up to wishful thinking perhaps.

I think it's because they thought no-one would look. However, they're wise to it now!

 

[Fluffy]

( you´re not being clear ) The web searches came from Washington DC and Tel Aviv iirc prior to the assassination , so no ?

I think mabar means because the searches implicate Charlie and the connection of Tyler as the shooter, it also takes the heat off his security detail being invoked in anyway.

 

[Ricardo]

I think mabar means because the searches implicate Charlie and the connection of Tyler as the shooter, it also takes the heat off his security detail being invoked in anyway.

OK , but since it´s prior to the event this is more information that points to a conspiracy not otherwise, if were not to be left out in public the prevailing information otherwise would be the "official narrative" (optimally) , so for now i remain on the opinion that this info was not meant for "release" , ie wishfull thinking. (imo)

 

[Mark7]

Google Trends shows a massive surge in searches for “Tyler Robinson Charlie Kirk” on July 14, 2025. Two months before the act.

Tyler Robinson was unknown before he killed Kirk, so just a few searches of his name alone would occur. Multiple searches occurring with his specific name, followed by Charlie Kirk's, before the shooting, would be astronomically unlikely, it seems. Google doesn't quantify exact numbers, but searches for his name were in the 100s, perhaps, maybe low 1000s? So massive improbabilities multiplied together create a very, very improbable event. Really amazing, maybe not so much if there is a computer burp of some sort behind it all.

 

[Fluffy]

OK , but since it´s prior to the event this is more information that points to a conspiracy not otherwise, if were not to be left out in public the prevailing information otherwise would be the "official narrative" (optimally) , so for now i remain on the opinion that this info was not meant for "release" , ie wishfull thinking. (imo)

Agreed, and it could be one of those necessary ‘paper trails’ that have to be left for those seeking the truth. I don’t think that it’s exclusive to 4DSTS that only they have yo leave their ‘signature’. The wishful thinking part is quite possibly that they HOPE no one goes looking.

Imagine having to try to cover your tracks when there are archeologists everywhere digging about, how stressful!

 

[Ricardo]

Agreed, and it could be one of those necessary ‘paper trails’ that have to be left for those seeking the truth. I don’t think that it’s exclusive to 4DSTS that only they have yo leave their ‘signature’. The wishful thinking part is quite possibly that they HOPE no one goes looking.

( fwiw / imo ) The leaving clues part is related to , in a wider sense , not to choice but to the fact that 3rd or 4th relate to consciousness and its relation to reality (all) , so 4th STS by their actions leave , if you will , imprints on reality that relate to an environment / FRV wherein will directs it as such , since sts/sto paths are "mostly" not chosen in 3rd this still happens but usually to a lesser degree .

( quotes in "mostly" because there´s quadrillions of other 3rd STO planets elsewhere according to transcripts)

 

[mabar]

( you´re not being clear ) The web searches came from Washington DC and Tel Aviv iirc prior to the assassination , so no ?

I think mabar means because the searches implicate Charlie and the connection of Tyler as the shooter, it also takes the heat off his security detail being invoked in anyway.

Is more that the searching is something that goes down the infinite rabbit hole of conspiracies. I believe more in what Joe posted below, and there are many levels of involvement that are not being disclosed.

Sort of. But at least for me, the exploding microphone was the obvious best option before we had any special insight. It's literally right there in front of people's faces.

 

[Voyageur]

Oh FFS. He's turned 'actor theorist'.

Right there, all of Gueynot's past work must be critically examined and not taken at face-value.

Laurent retracted his earlier comment:

https://www.unz.com/article/the-public-execution-of-charlie-kirk/

While Chris Martenson has, I believe, conclusively shown that Charlie Kirk was shot from a different building at Utah Valley University (the Sorenson Student Center) than the one where Tyler Robinson was allegedly positioned (the Losee Center)—also disproving, in my view, speculations of a fake death, which I wrongly defended in an earlier article—other researchers continue to accumulate evidence that, in the weeks preceding Kirk’s death, his pro-Israel backers were trying to blackmail and threaten him into abandoning his recent criticism of Israel.

Gueynot's new lean is to Martenson's "conclusively shown," which is not conclusive.

 

[Ruth]

Rick Cutler is looking like a quite a 'person of interest' in the Charlie Kirk killing, or at least one of a few people at the scene. Oh and I didn't know Candace had a gag order placed on her until this youtuber mentioned it.

 

[hiker]

Oh and I didn't know Candace had a gag order placed on her until this youtuber mentioned it.

Found an article about the gag order:

The high-profile murder of far-right commentator Charlie Kirk has triggered a media firestorm, conspiracy theories, and now, a gag order, but conservative commentator Candace Owens says she has no intention of staying silent.

What Is the Gag Order?

In the case of State v. Tyler Robinson, 4th District Court Judge Tony Graf has issued a gag order, legally prohibiting attorneys from both sides from making public statements that could prejudice the ongoing trial. Robinson, 22, is charged with aggravated murder and other felonies in connection to the September 10 shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University.

The gag order is meant to ensure a fair trial by limiting public commentary from those directly involved in the legal proceedings. Specifically, it restricts lawyers from releasing extrajudicial comments that could sway public opinion or influence jurors.

Judge Graf emphasized the order's intent, stating, “Regardless of who is watching, whether it is the nation or a single individual, we must fulfil our roles with integrity, civility and diligence. I encourage each of you to give your very best to this case. Neither Mr. Robinson nor the people of Utah deserve anything less than the fair and impartial administration of justice.”

While the order applies legally to attorneys, it does not extend to the general public or media personalities, though it clearly seeks to calm the rhetoric surrounding the case.

Why Is Candace Owens Defying It?

Candace Owens, a polarizing media figure and longtime associate of Kirk, has been vocally defiant. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), she wrote, “Don’t worry about the gag order in the Charlie Kirk case. I plan to violate it on the world’s behalf.”

Owens has positioned herself as one of the loudest voices questioning the official narrative of Kirk’s murder. She has also claimed there’s more to the story, even stating, “The things I’ve discovered this past week are enough to burn the house down.”

While she has yet to disclose what she claims to have uncovered, her online activity, including sharing alleged group chat screenshots which, according to her, showed Kirk's wavering support for Israel and suggesting a federal cover-up, has kept speculation alive. Owens has also criticized Erika Kirk, Charlie’s widow, for participating in a photoshoot shortly after his death, questioning her motives and actions.

While the gag order is not legally binding on Owens, her defiance raises questions about the limits of free speech during high-stakes legal proceedings and the influence of public figures on the court of public opinion.

Candace's X post:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1980112064216711408

Don’t worry about the gag order in the Charlie Kirk case.

I plan to violate it on the world’s behalf.

The things I’ve discovered this past week are enough to burn the house down.

Yes, Charlie was betrayed. By everyone.

Judged by what was written in the above article, one could guess that "everyone" includes Erika Kirk. ("Owens has also criticized Erika Kirk, Charlie’s widow, for participating in a photoshoot shortly after his death, questioning her motives and actions.")

I had missed Candace's critique, so I asked Grok about it. Apparently, it took place (at least according to Grok):

Did Candace Owens criticize Erika Kirk for participating in a photoshoot soon after her husband's death?

Yes, Candace Owens did criticize Erika Kirk for participating in a photoshoot shortly after the death of her husband, Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, who was assassinated in September 2025. Owens mocked Kirk's actions as inconsistent with grieving, contrasting them with her own efforts to question the circumstances of the death, which she has framed as a potential cover-up involving federal agencies and external pressures on Charlie Kirk related to his views on Israel.

Key Details from Owens' Criticism

Timing and Context: Charlie Kirk was killed on September 14, 2025. Owens began publicly questioning the official narrative (including claims that the accused, Tyler Robinson, was framed) within days. She highlighted Erika Kirk's media appearances and photoshoots—reportedly occurring hours or days after the assassination—as evidence that Kirk was not sufficiently demanding answers about the murder.

Specific Statements by Owens:
"What kind of widow would not want the truths of her husband's murder to come out?" Owens asked, tying this to Kirk's lack of public scrutiny and her focus on photoshoots instead.
She implied Kirk's behavior was suspicious or inappropriate for a grieving widow, stating she was "doing photoshoots hours after Charlie Kirk's death while [Owens] was raising crucial questions."

Broader Feud: Owens' comments are part of a larger public dispute, including claims that she was excluded from Kirk's memorial and accusations of a "controlled narrative" by Turning Point USA donors. This has drawn backlash from conservative figures, who accused Owens of exploiting the tragedy for attention and worsening Kirk's grief.

Erika Kirk's Response

Kirk addressed the criticism indirectly in a statement on October 14, 2025, emphasizing that "there's no linear blueprint for grief." She described her mourning as personal, carrying Charlie's memory "in every breath, in every ache," and focused on continuing his work without engaging Owens' conspiracy theories directly.

Public Reaction

Supporters of Owens viewed her comments as bold truth-seeking.
Critics, including other conservatives like Pete Hegseth, called it "pure evil" and spotlight-chasing, arguing it disrespected a widow's pain. Social media posts amplified outrage, with some questioning why Owens "cares more about Charlie Kirk than his own wife."

This incident highlights tensions within conservative circles over Kirk's legacy, conspiracy narratives, and public mourning. Owens has continued discussing the case on her podcast and X, vowing to defy a related gag order.

 

[JEEP]

Jimmy Dore posted 1 hour ago - just started watching:

 

[JEEP]

Jimmy Dore posted 1 hour ago - just started watching:

At around 13:54, Jimmy says the rifle was left on property owned by Palantir! Well, that's a new fly in the ointment!