As of now, we have only our questions about the who and the why of the murder of Charlie Kirk. But questions, the right ones, have a power all their own.
F.B.I. released image of a person of interest sought in connection with the killing of Charlie Kirk, Sept. 10, 2025. (Wikimedia, CCTV/Released bv the Federal Bureau of Investigation)
By Patrick Lawrence
ScheerPost
So many questions arise since a sniper with demonstrated skill assassinated conservative activist Charlie Kirk in broad daylight on Sept. 10 — this as he addressed a crowd of several thousand no less.
We have only our questions as of now, and history suggests these may be all we will ever have as to the who and why of this very public crime. But we damn well better get on with the business of posing them: Questions, the right ones, have a power all their own.
Charlie Kirk’s murder abruptly confronts us with the disintegration of what little remains of any shared identity and purpose among Americans, with the force of ideology, the invisibility of power, how much may be left out or simply falsified when officials give accounts of politically momentous events and when media reproduce these accounts with no hint of questioning them. We find ourselves plunging well beyond the apple-pie authoritarianism that threatened a few years ago. No apple pie this time.
To begin at the beginning, who is Tyler Robinson, the 22–year-old formally charged Sept. 16 with murdering Kirk with a single shot fired from a .30–06 Winchester at considerable range? Who — the much larger question for its implications — was Charlie Kirk, the 31–year-old wunderkind of America’s conservative movement? At this point we have no certain answers in either case. We have, instead, what appear to be fraudulent narratives that are messily under construction even as we speak.
Tyler Robinson, C-Span coverage of Sept. 16, 2025 court appearance. (C-Span Video Stillshot)
Tyler Robinson, by all accounts, was an upright student in the electrical apprenticeship program at Dixie Technical College in St. George, Utah, until Sept. 10. Churchgoing, “very considerate, quiet, respectful:” These are the descriptions of a neighbor in a Utah suburb called Washington.
“He was a good kid,” Kristen Schwiermann added when she spoke to NBC News the day after Robinson was detained as a suspect. His grandmother called him “squeaky clean.”
The NBC report noted: “Robinson’s evolution from standout student to the subject of an FBI manhunt is not clear.” This is to put the point too mildly.
On Sept. 11 the F.B.I. — admitting they had no certainty on this point — released two blurry photographs that showed someone in a stairwell at Utah Valley University, where Kirk was assassinated the previous day.
A friend of Robinson’s saw them and remarked in a messaging platform called Discord that Robinson resembled the man in the photos. Robinson replied immediately, according to a widely circulated New York Times report, that “his ‘Doppelganger’ was trying to ‘get me in trouble.’”
Somebody else on Discord then wrote, “Tyler killed Charlie!!!!”—this “apparently in jest,” as the Times rightfully reported.
The thought that this was anything other than a humorous exchange among friends is patently ridiculous, in my read. But matters nonetheless proceeded. Robinson was arrested at his home later that day. Initial reports had it that he turned himself in peaceably; we now read he is not cooperating.
The air has since been thick with innuendo. So far as one can make out, Robinson seems to be of mildly progressive political persuasions and, naturally enough, did not like Kirk. We read that he favors the sort of gender politics Kirk stood against.
There are reports he, Robinson, has been romantically involved with a roommate who is transitioning from male to female. There are other reports that bullet casings found at the scene have, Luigi Mangione-style, inscriptions on them referencing video games with various anti-fascist and gender-related messages.
OK, but strictly for the sake of argument. None of this comes even close to holding up as a motive.
“We’re trying to figure it out,” Spencer “We got him” Cox, Utah’s conservative governor, said on Meet the Press last Sunday— this as he explained how a clean-as–Gene college student, in a feat of exceptional marksmanship, turned into a deadly assassin after he was “deeply indoctrinated in leftist ideology.”
How and when did that happen, we are compelled to ask. There seems to be no record of any such conversion. Here is Cox elaborating his case:
“Friends have confirmed that there was kind of that deep, dark internet, the Reddit culture, and these other dark places of the internet where this person was going deep.”
Deep and dark places and going deep, just as friends have confirmed. I’m sorry, Governor. This starts to come over like “Invaders from Mars,” that 1953 Cold War classic, wherein plain-vanilla suburbanites fall into a pit and aliens from outer space turn them into enemies of the state by putting mind-control buttons in the backs of their necks.
Brilliant, if you go on for that sort of thing. And I suppose some people do.
Governor Cox has it that Tyler Robinson acted alone. As if to confirm this, we now read he plotted his plan of action for a week and wrote text messages to this effect beforehand.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller speaking at the 2025 Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Maryland, Feb. 22, 2025. (Gage Skidmore/ Flickr/ CC BY-SA 2.0)
President Trump and his adjutants say — I may as well quote the Times again — “the suspect was part of a coordinated movement that was fomenting violence against conservatives.” Here is Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, speaking apoplectically on Fox News Sept. 12:
“There is a domestic terrorist movement in this country. When you see these organized doxxing campaigns, where the left calls people enemies of the republic, says they’re fascists, says they’re Nazis, says they’re evil, and then prints their addresses, what do you think they are trying to do? They are trying to inspire someone to murder them. That is their objective. That is their intent.”
Questions, questions. Is Robinson the lone gunman, the Lee Harvey Oswald of the case? Or does he belong to some dangerous movement on a murder spree? What is this “left” Miller and his employer talk of incessantly?
We do not know even this much. But these questions lead to the obvious conclusion — obvious to me, in any case — that the official account of the Kirk assassination is still under construction and good old American paranoia and ideological imperatives mix to make the mortar that will bind its bricks together.
This seems even truer in Kirk’s case than in Robinson’s.
Charlie Kirk speaking with attendees at the 2025 Student Action Summit at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Florida in July 2025. (Gage Skidmore/ Flickr/ CC BY-SA 4.0)
Charlie Kirk was a true-blue conservative and ranked very high among President Trump’s most prominent and influential allies. He was handy enough in the cause of this or that propaganda op.
His movement, Turning Point USA, had received millions of dollars in support over the years from Zionist donors — Israel’s American cutouts, as some commentators have it. He stood for freedom, truth, Judeo–Christian values, and the Zionist cause and against, among very much else, liberal censorship and wokery of all kinds.
This is the Charlie Kirk the narrative-builders speak of now that Kirk is dead. It is the Kirk you can read about in any mainstream publication you may come across.
It was none other than Benjamin Netanyahu who set the ball in motion. In a bit of timing many have questioned, the Israeli prime minister went on X with prayers for Kirk within a matter of minutes of his death. Two hours later he posted this:
“Charlie Kirk was murdered for speaking truth and defending freedom. A lion-hearted friend of Israel, he fought the lies and stood tall for Judeo–Christian civilization. I spoke to him only two weeks ago and invited him to Israel. Sadly, that visit will not take place. We lost an incredible human being. His boundless pride in America and his valiant belief in free speech will leave a lasting impact. Rest in peace, Charlie Kirk.”
A day later Bill Ackman, the Zionist billionaire, followed Netanyahu on X to boast of his close friendship with Kirk. “I feel incredibly privileged to have spent a day and shared a meal with @charliekirk11 this summer,” Ackman wrote. “He was a giant of a man.”
On Sept. 15, J.D. Vance sat behind Kirk’s desk as host of The Charlie Kirk Show. Here is Stephen Miller, speaking to the vice-president on that occasion:
“We are going to channel all of the anger that we have over the organized campaign that led to this assassination, to uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”
Kirk as a martyr to the right-wing and Zionist causes: To term this shocking hypocrisy is wholly inadequate. As Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil reported in The Grayzone Sept. 12, by mid-summer Kirk had turned on Netanyahu, if not Israel, and was vigorously critical of the Trump regime’s relations with “the Jewish state.”
Here is a snippet from the Blumenthal–Parampil report, which ScheerPost also carried. It is based on a source who was close to Kirk and well-connected in the White House:
“In the weeks leading up to his Sept. 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.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the U.N. General Assembly holding a map that omits Palestine and shows Iran’s allies as a dark crescent across the Middle East, Sept. 27, 2024. (UN Photo/Loey Felipe)
Those who had so recently benefacted Kirk turned against him as he turned against them when he finally grew disgusted by their undue influence. He thereafter faced incessant pressure — such that he came to fear for his life — from Israel’s most powerful American allies, many of whom had donated millions of dollars to Turning Point USA.
In a separate piece published Sept. 15, Blumenthal reports on an early August meeting Ackman arranged with Kirk and various American Zionists in the Hamptons, the fashionable east end of Long Island. Kirk was so viciously attacked for his betrayals that he came away feeling “frightened.”
So much for that day and that meal Ackman was privileged to spend with Kirk a month before he was assassinated.
The Grayzone’s reports explode the orthodox narrative of Charlie Kirk and the meaning of his murder. Apart from the close-in account of Kirk’s political turn, we have now had a look at just how directly Netanyahu has habitually imposed his will on the Trump White House.
These pieces are Pulitzer-worthy for what they reveal, although Blumenthal and Parampil will never see a Pulitzer, as mainstream media, busily defending the parallel universe they assist in constructing, continue resolutely to ignore their work.
Charlie Kirk’s assassin could have got his or her work done a hundred different ways. Kirk could have been run off the road, or bombed in one or another manner, or shot while driving home one evening, no one there to see it, just a corpse slumped over a steering wheel.
Behavior Scientist Thomas Karat’s Substack video, Charlie Kirk Assassinated! Who Benefits? (YouTube Screenshot)
But as Thomas Karat, a psychologist with long experience in behavior analysis, wrote in a lengthy essay published Sept. 13, Kirk’s assassination was not about turning him into a dead body. It was about vastly more. Here is Karat in a 23–minute video he published along with the Substack essay:
“The bullet isn’t the story. The story will come after. Because assassinations aren’t just about killing a man. They are about who gets to write the script the minute the body hits the ground.”
And so we return to our questions and our questions and our questions. Was Kirk’s murder about the generation of what Karat calls “social tension,” as this kind of violence was often meant to serve during the Cold War decades?
Was it about defending a cause against a former insider with enough influence to threaten it? Was it possibly meant, as some suggest, as a warning to those who turn coats?
We arrive, then, at the most important question of all. Cui bono, to whom goes the good? It is scarcely a week since Kirk was murdered, and I have already heard this question more times than I can count. There are answers to this — I have two, not difficult to figure — but within these answers we find more questions that have no answers.
There is, first, the Trump regime. I have already quoted Trump’s lieutenants and goons — is Stephen Miller anything more than a goon with a jumped-up title? — sufficiently to suggest that a major attack on left-wing terrorist groups, whoever these may prove to be, is in the offing.
As there are no left-wing terrorist groups to attack, this is likely to prove a not-well-defined campaign against American liberalism altogether, the limits and legality of which we cannot yet know.
I have a difficult time imagining the president or anyone near him had a hand in Kirk’s assassination. In my read, these are no more than disgraceful opportunists tipping the murder of an increasingly disgusted critic upside down so that he comes out a martyr, a patron saint of rightist repression.
Trump has already proposed a Charlie Kirk Act, which would, if this goes anywhere, revive and recast a Cold War statute to control media in the name of “accountability.”
I have less difficulty imagining the Israelis had a hand in Kirk’s assassination, even if I am limited to imaginings. Netanyahu’s instant professions of sorrow, and then the effusive praise: As Thomas Karat points out persuasively, official statements of this kind are customarily deliberated, written and vetted over a period of hours before they go public. Twenty minutes after the fact? The question raised is obvious.
Beyond this, an inexplicable detail, there is the Israelis’ record of assassinations, one that, on evidence extending far back in history, knows no limits. Netanyahu — who doth protest far too much, as I read him — went on American television last weekend to say any suggestion of Israeli involvement is “just insane.”
Well, there is no evidence — not yet, anyway — to indicate Kirk’s murder was another Mossad job, but we ought to remind ourselves as we think this through it is very far from insane to consider the question.
Political violence in the United States occurs in cycles, Edward Luce, a Financial Times columnist, astutely remarked in a long piece the other day. Luce, a longtime student of American politics, cited the four assassinations of the 1960s — the two Kennedys, King, Malcolm X — as a case in point.
“But there is a crucial difference between then and now,” he observed. “The killings of King and Kennedy were not accompanied by high-level incitement to revenge.” This time, he points out, we have Republicans in Congress shouting across the aisle, “Y’all caused this. You fucking own this,” and other such niceties.
The social fabric in America has been fraying for years of course. But Luce is right to suggest the Kirk assassination has tipped us into a new and dark time. We are a nation of homeless wanderers now, it seems to me, no longer capable of finding our way to even a glimmer of unity or light.
When I take a step back from the questions I propose in this commentary, it seems to me a measure of the trouble we are in that we have to pose any of them. How far down to the bottom? Is this the question all the others leave us to ask?
Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a columnist, essayist, lecturer and author, most recently of Journalists and Their Shadows, available from Clarity Press or via Amazon. Other books include Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century. His Twitter account, @thefloutist, has been permanently censored.
TO MY READERS. Independent publications and those who write for them reach a moment that is difficult and full of promise all at once. On one hand, we assume ever greater responsibilities in the face of mainstream media’s mounting derelictions. On the other, we have found no sustaining revenue model and so must turn directly to our readers for support. I am committed to independent journalism for the duration: I see no other future for American media. But the path grows steeper, and as it does I need your help. This grows urgent now. In recognition of the commitment to independent journalism, please subscribe to The Floutist, or via my Patreon account.
This article is from ScheerPost.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Mr. Lawrences key question of who benefits rings strongly, particularly with this being a politically loaded assassination. The political avalanche of outrage that rolled down from the heights of power has clearly stacked the cards against any presumption of innocence or normal investigative procedures. If innocent he is the object of a careful plot and will need something powerful to avoid being found guilty. I hope a serious lawyer will defend him.
The evidence so far suggests that Tyler Robinson is the most plausible suspect with already some serious evidence that he committed the crime. If not, he would have to have been set up deliberately as the patsy. Why and who might choose him? This would also imply a longer term plan to kill Kirk, possibly contingent on Kirk’s choices regarding the genocide in Gaza . If Israelis are involved they would have to have high level US support. So I foolishly consider how, with no strong belief and only internet gathered information.
Information First
1) One X writer claims an intel agency determined that there were 12 people in the crowd with Israeli registered cell phones.
2) videos show hand signals by Kirk’s bodyguards right before the murder, and showed one guard moving away from the path of the bullet. One of the signalers was using his phone to video Kirk.
3) The person exiting the roof had no rifle, but (apparently) Robinsons Mauser was stashed on the ground nearby
4) The video images of Robinson are grainy( sometimes very rough) and he has dark glasses and a distinctive t-shirt.
5) TR’s email to his presumed gay partner conveniently provides a complete confession with all details needed for a conviction.
6) His alleged male lover is said to be considering “gender transition”, which provides a motive to Robinson, and fits the growing narrative of the right that trans people are prone to political killing.
7) Kirk’s personal security team appears to have had several Israelis.
7) Kirk opposed the Israeli attack on Iran and US support for it, refused money from Netanyahu, and refused to tow the line for Ackman. He also opposed the US support for Ukraine. He seems to have been sincere in his sense of personal morality and while wanting a deeper investigation into Epstein, including the possible Mossad blackmail connection, he naively thought Trump innocent of any personal abuse, and was backing off on the Issue after an appeal to Trump for full investigation. Kirk had invited Marjory T Greene to debate( not with him and on her terms) and argue for forcing AIPAC to register as a foreign agent and for Israel to stop the genocide.
One plausible possibility of state conspiracy –
Tyler Robinson loved guns and was a good shot. He smart but only 22 and was living at home until recently in a right leaning family. Mormons have always been friendly to Israel. TR could have been recruited into some promised intelligence role for the CIA or other intel service. He could have been the perfect patsy for this assassination.
Kirk was smart, well organized, attractive , media savvy and was growing rapidly in influence and popularity; he was very persuasive and may have turned strongly against Netanyahu’s genocide and AIPAC influence in US politics. He had powerful people as enemies who might perceive him to be more useful as a martyr who died while still on their side, than an independent conservative like the hard-to-control Tucker Carlson. His value as martyr is powerful, and already useful to Trump and Netanyahu.
When considering motive, is it necessary to identify a clear, logical reason? For example, Chapman killed Lennon because he believed Lennon was a phoney, and Hinckley shot Reagan in an attempt to impress Jodie Foster—these motives may not seem rational to others. What drives a person to act may not always make sense. In my view, there is sufficient evidence to establish motive in this case.
If Mr. Robinson gets Rubensteined or Epsteined before testifying at trial, I’ll be convinced state actors are involved in Kirk’s murder. Ruby and Oswald were well acquainted with each other in the Big Easy prior to the former murdering the latter in the big D. The two early fake suspects who were detained and released quickly, crowd members cheering the spectacle. These things put a big stink on the lone gunman hypothesis.
It doesn’t take an exceptionally skilled marksman to hit a seated person from 200 yards away in broad daylight, if the shooter has a decent scope and some way of stabilizing the rifle. This could have been done by an experienced hunter or someone who spent some time at a range and/or practicing. (The downward angle from the rooftop to the seat under the canopy would be easy to practice in the hilly, deer-hunting area where I live, and probably so in Utah/”greater Utah”.) This implies a pretty large field of potential suspects, so the feds seem to have gotten very lucky indeed.
The fact that the head of the FBI at this moment is someone as ignorant, insecure, super-online, blabby, and in over his head as Kash Patel makes for an environment rich in eyebrow-raising statements, but that actually provides *less* information than a more organized & “traditional” investigation selectively leaking.
The speed with which Netanyahu responded to the event is actually pretty funny, because the image of anything provoking deep discomfort for the director of the genocide is funny. If he or his people had recently been in touch with Kirk, he’d have had a strong sense of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” wrt making a statement right away. It seems entirely in character for him to choose immediate response in line with what he’d expect Trump to want to hear, and then to keep on digging with later denials & accusations. The week Kirk was shot, Israel attacked people in six countries, including first-ever Qatar. It seems like an astoundingly bold choice to have added Utah to this frenzied agenda. But ymmv.
There is information regarding the exit of the bullet being from the front of Charlie’s throat area,i.e. the voluminous blood gushing out. This not meant to go into the gory aspect of the assassination but if indeed the exit is frontal then it discredits Robinson being the shooter. Will we ever hear more on this issue ?If true ,probably not , as it would be the smoking gun to use an inappropriate analogy .
Great article. Now we need to go further in answering the question of who benefits from the assassination. What you say about the Israeli Government totally makes sense. But the NATO governments also benefit. And so do all the forces in the U.S. “deep state” who want to pursue the NATO war effort in Ukraine.
Charlie Kirk was one of the top people on talk radio to oppose the NATO war effort in Ukraine.
An excellent examination of the shooting by Zeb Boykin shows the large front neck wound was an exit wound. This is confirmed by Candace Owens report that the camera directly behind Kirk showed no blood, which is consistent with a typically small entrance wound. Hence the shot came from behind Kirk. This would make Robinson a patsy, and the operation a carefully planned professional hit.
The Boykin video is on Rumble. Owens videos are on YouTube.
I’ll try again. Who benefits from the Kirk murder. The same groups who pay big media for ads will have strong viewer numbers and rake in the dough.
Running them a close second will the donations to churches.
Not sorry, at this point when the start killing each other I could not ask for anything better for we the people! This all was out of control before Charlies got hit, I’m not sure what everyone was expecting. You throw enough gas on the fire you will get burnt.
“When Benjamin Netanyahu holds up a map of the Middle East in which Palestine has been erased and Israel stretches from the river to the sea, he is applauded as a visionary who is working to realise the dream of a Jewish homeland.”
“But when Palestinians and their supporters chant ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’, they are accused of explicitly calling for the genocide of Jews.”
“Are they really? Or is that a sick imagination projecting its own darkness onto others?” An imagination that cannot countenance diversity, cannot countenance the idea of living in a country alongside other people, equally, with equal rights. Like everybody else in the world does. An imagination that cannot afford to acknowledge that Palestinians want to be free, like South Africa is, like India is, like all countries that have thrown off the yoke of colonialism are. Countries that are diverse, deeply, maybe even fatally, flawed, but free.”
“When South Africans were chanting their popular rallying cry, Amandla! Power to the people, were they calling for the genocide of white people? They were not. They were calling for the dismantling of the Apartheid state. Just as the Palestinians are.” Arundhati Roy @ hxxps://pentransmissions.com/2024/10/15/no-propaganda-on-earth-can-hide-the-wound-that-is-palestine-arundhati-roys-pen-pinter-prize-2024-speech/
The idea that the Mossad or Israeli operatives killed the Zionist Kirk is absurd. Sure, he made a couple of mild statements just before his murder that were critical of Israeli power and Zionist influence but that’s bc the genocide has been so ugly and so blatantly in your face that he needed to make some kind of face-saving damage control move as 95% of Americans under 30 y.o. now despise Israel.
If the Mossad actually pulled this off they would have used a patsy who was hardcore pro-Hamas, an ardent advocate of Palestine to pin it on instead of some autist obsessed with ID politics culture wars.
Let’s get a grip. Israel and the Zionist supremacists are guilty of repulsive conduct, but they played no hand in killing Kirk.
Let’s keep our eyes on the ball.
Mr. Lawrence provides a polished and well-written view of the motives behind Kirk’s death.
But he dismisses off-hand what may be the reason, and that may be because he likes the factors behind the narrative of those who clearly do not profit from this killing.
I think he needs to give more time for whatever rationale was involved to gain more reliability and validity.
Predictably, Russia, China and Iran are now being blamed for at least some of the tensions appearing in the US over Kirk’s death.
washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/09/18/russia-leverages-kirk-shooting-propaganda-false-claims-surge/
or archive.ph/LC3o6 without paywall
Echoes of JFK assassination: sniper expert needed, although Lee Harvey Oswald
was near-sighted and couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn. Inconvenient rifle
found, mysterious foot prints by a sign in the JFK motorcade (“JFK and the
Unspeakable,” J.W.Douglass). And the “script” immediately written: US Cold
War with then Soviet Union will continue and the military-industrial complex will
not be deprived of death and destruction. Johnson-Nixon continued Vietnam’s
genocidal incursion.
Who benefits? The war industry and the terrorist Republican Party
(Noam Chomsky term).
Not for nothing; BUT, “[HOW MUCH] may be left out or simply falsified when officials give accounts of politically momentous events and when media reproduce these accounts with no hint of questioning them,” PATRICK LAWRENCE
“IS AS AMERICAN as that “momentous” apple, cherry, bluephknberry pie.” LeoSun. IMO, the land of the free & the home of the brave is a f/war zone! “Kill, first. Think, later,” is all about Presidents’ using, abusing, abandoning animal, plant, human life, in a heartbeat; AND, moving on, w/o reflection, ownership, etc., to the next disaster.
“We find ourselves plunging well beyond the apple-pie authoritarianism that threatened a few years ago. No apple pie this time.” Patrick Lawrence. “Lasciali mangiare la torta” (Let them eat cake). Il Beneficiario, IMO, Israele, Ucraina, l’America.
“We have only our questions as of now, and history suggests these may be all we will ever have as to the who and why of this very public crime” [Never Say Die], “Questions, the right ones, have a power all their own.” Patrick Lawrence.
10.15.24: 1) *“Is it better to kill people outright or to starve them slowly”? 2) “Which would look better?” 3) Who “would willingly submit to the indignity that Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank have been subjected to for decades? 4) What peaceful means have the Palestinian people not tried? 5) What compromise have they not accepted – other than the one that requires them to crawl on their knees and eat dirt?” Arundhati Roy, PEN Pinter Prize 2024.
6) 9.19.25, “[HOW] a clean-as–Gene college student, in a feat of exceptional marksmanship, turned into a deadly assassin after he was “deeply indoctrinated in leftist ideology.” Patrick Lawrence
7) 9.11.25, “‘Nine. One. One. WHAT’S your emergency?” ‘At this point, f/“uncertainty.” FBI’s rock’n 2 “blurry photographs that showed someone in a stairwell at Utah Valley University, where Kirk was assassinated the previous day., Sept. 11, 2025.” Basically, the emergency is murder, “WHO f/“ordered” it?”
8) “CUI BONO?” (to whom goes the good)? There are answers to this — I have two,” Patrick Lawrence. “Me, too.”(Secondo me. Gli assassini nelle alte sfere) IMO, the killers in high places. Secondo me, Israele, Ucraina, l’America aka Assassini in alto.”
9) Edward Luce, “Ha le ricevute?” (Luce, got “Receipts?) ‘The state of Israel was relatively new-born in 1963.”
….. ‘The killings of King and Kennedy were not accompanied by high-level incitement to revenge.” Edward Luce
“As president JFK was taking a strong stand against the demands of the Zionist lobby; particularly its desire to help Israel become a major world power; &, as a consequence paid w/his life.” Michael Collins Piper @ The New Jerusalem.
10) “Old Glory” flying upside-down on a stick, “political violence” or SFO? Imo, we are a Divided States of Corporate America, fm sea to shining sea. Concluding, “Political Violence” is as American as Apple Pie!!!
…… “Avanti e verso l’alto” (Onward & Upwards)!!! TY, Patrick Lawrence, CN, et al.
* Arundhati Roy’s Speech @ hxxps://pentransmissions.com/2024/10/15/no-propaganda-on-earth-can-hide-the-wound-that-is-palestine-arundhati-roys-pen-pinter-prize-2024-speech/
Great article. Now we need to go further in answering the question of who benefits from the assassination. What you say about the Israeli Government totally makes sense. But the NATO governments also benefit. And so do all the forces in the U.S. “deep state” who want to pursue the NATO war effort in Ukraine.
Charlie Kirk was one of the top people on talk radio to oppose the NATO war effort in Ukraine.
Your last observation is one that few seem to have made thus far in the written media. I had heard of Ukraine’s baneful “outreach” efforts to suppress popular opposition to war funding in the US, in similar fashion to how AIPAC attacks US skeptics in our domestic media. Of course, there’s no proof for any of these wacko conspiracy theories involving Israel. It wouldn’t matter if there were, apparently.
One plausible possibility of state conspiracy – ( the last section of full version appearing below)
Tyler Robinson loved guns and was a good shot. He was smart but only 22 and was living at home until recently in a right leaning family. Mormons have always been friendly to Israel. TR could have been recruited into some promised intelligence role for the CIA or other intel service. Or he could have simply been chose because of the gun and a credible personal motive of hatred for Kirk’s stand on Gay and trans people, he could have been the perfect patsy for this assassination.
Kirk was smart, well organized, attractive , media savvy and was growing rapidly in influence and popularity with the Republican Christian conservative base; he was very persuasive and may have turned strongly against Netanyahu’s genocide and AIPAC influence in US politics. He had powerful people as enemies who might perceive him to be more useful as a martyr who died while still on their side, than an independent conservative like the hard-to-control Tucker Carlson. His value as martyr is powerful, and already very useful to Trump and Netanyahu.
Wow, I get to read one of the 500,00 “mostly Jewish” conspiracy theories on Kirk circulating on the internet. Probably the most reasoned, written by PL. Eventually I may live to see a real one.
NOT a conspiracy is the Dems misusing Kirk’s death to blow the mid-terms. Reds were going to lose both houses, have their way with Trump for two years. But Blues, led by AOC, are poking the lazy Reds, who wouldn’t have bothered to vote, while rabid Blue Trump haters would have 100% participation, to have the hate-filled rage that is the main reasons Americans vote these days. Dems never miss a chance to donate elections to Reds.
Sure, the Dems are incompetent and rudderless, but the Republicans were going to cast this as a frightful cabal of liberal devil worshipers, and whip up their followers into a frenzy, not matter what the Dems did. They should have remained passive, again?
If there is any justice, no one including Charlie will. IMHO
Members of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary:
(Majority)
Chuck Grassley, Iowa, Chair
Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
John Cornyn, Texas
Mike Lee, Utah
Ted Cruz, Texas
Josh Hawley, Missouri
Thom Tillis, Missouri
John Kennedy, Louisiana
Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee
Eric Schmitt, Missouri
Katie Britt, Alabama
Ashley Moody, Florida
(Minority)
Dick Durbin, Illinois, Ranking Member
Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island
Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota
Chris Coons, Delaware
Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut
Mazie Hirono, Hawaii
Cory Booker, New Jersey
Alex Padilla, California
Peter Welch, Vermont
Adam Schiff, California
The Committee Chair and Ranking Member, Mr. Grassley and Mr. Durbin, have the opportunity to put an END to widespread, JFK-level, potentially tragic division across America regarding the assassination of Charlie Kirk: Arranging for a recorded/filmed 60-minute sit down discussion with Kirk murder suspect Tyler Robinson, and then sharing their three-way discussion with the American people.
And if Robinson remains unwilling to talk, a recorded/filmed 60-minute waterboarding session to encourage him?
If Israel/Zionists carried out this killing you can rest assured there will be no repercussions for Israel.
They were blatantly able to attack the USS Liberty and kill American servicemen, and the USA covered it up, and still does. Oh, and Charlie Kirk stated that the USS Liberty was just a conspiracy theory. Go figure.
We’ll just have to add this one to the ever expanding list of ‘Ripley’s Believe It or Not!’ mysteries including: JFK, RFK, USS Liberty, 9/11, Soleimani, Ebrahim Raisi, 7/10, Trumpx2, Kirk, etc.
Charlie Kirk was a powerful political leader who had turned against the Zionist political establishment led by Trump and Netanyahu. Now it appears that they are trying to co-opt CK’s memory to cover their tracks(?) and further their control.
Some have likened the assassination and the gaslighting to the Reichstag. Others point to the JFK assassination.
Either way, free speech and Constitutional government hang in the balance.
It’s worthwhile to check out what Tucker Carlson is saying about the Charlie Kirk assassination (available on youtube) for more info.
The problem I’m having is connecting the official story with Israel did it, which would have to mean that everything presented by Patel et al is a pack of lies. This would be deception on a horrific scale of conniving. Of course, this interpretation is tempting, given what’s happened over the years. But let’s consider what this would have to involve. All the messages Robinson supposedly wrote would have to be false, including that he “had the opportunity” and was tired of Kirk’s “hatred” on the trans issue. The DNA claim connecting him to the weapon, the towel, the screwdriver would also be entirely false. His father’s role would have to be invented and the reason for turning him in false, as well as statements from other relatives. We should perhaps recall that Thomas Crooks, who shot Trump’s ear, was similarly accused of being the patsy and where that went into oblivion. Mind you, I find what Netanyahu is eningeering ing in Gaza and elsewhere despicable, and the cooperation of those committing the genocide monstrous and inhuman. Kirk’s enthusiasm for the genocide and whether he was significantly leaving that behind, versus voicing some critical attitudes, is another question. My concern is that we don’t fall into the paranoia now essential to the ruling classes. In my view, we need to keep questioning and being skeptical.
Who else could it be but you know who?
hxxps://x.com/jacksonhinklle/status/1966647697198239990
Amazing. Sensible questions and context not seen much in the MSM. So many run around like chickens with no heads. Keep up the good work CN.
The word that repeatedly comes up when TV viewers use to describe their reaction to Netanyahu’s instantaneous eulogy to the announcement of Kirk’s death is that is was “odd.” The timing and suspect motive was just too weird to be normal. I shouldn’t need the disclaimer that I’m no antesemite, but having said that, I can’t deny noticing the further “oddity” that after Netanyahu’s curiously timed speech, a string of other “friends of Israel” followed (I was watching FOX), offering similar condolensces to the wife and family of the recently late gadfly. For months Trump voters have been frustrated by the president’s waffling on certain key issues that he ran on. He is not “waffling” because of some lack of character so much as being in over his head in a situation that is out of his and any other presdient’s control.
Kirk was killed by one of these ID politics obsessed trans-chasers who disliked Kirk’s take on those (distractive) issues.
Occam’s Razor.
Israel had nothing to do with it. Though the Zionists are sick sadistic bastards who are no doubt responsible for death and destruction every minute, they had nothing to do with this particular murder as Kirk was a staunch Israel backer his entire career despite a couple of damage control statements to the contrary over the past couple mos before his demise.
Kirk certainly was no one we should be honoring, that’s for sure.
The only big question left is how to fight back against the shredding of the First Amendment that’s coming in the wake of this highly provocative murder.
The “shredding of the First Amendment” was likely the whole purpose of the assassination. Genocidal Israel and its supporters (the corrupt US government) of course will benefit the most from this shredding. Already it seems that a martyred Charlie Kirk is doing more for Israel than a living Charlie Kirk could ever do.
If Y’ all would read the late Robert Parry’s American Dispatches, you might gain a great volume of insight into strange times.
I followed this story, same as the attempt on Trump’s ear.
Between the no account, totally useless MSM and an internet clogged with extraneous bull shit and the ever developing saga of Ole triple zero ‘000’ the orange ogre, MAGATs and their assaults on the government and U.S. Constitution dominate the four second concentration span of millions of Exceptional Americans who suck this drivel from their electronic devices. This event has spiraled out of control.
I’m not positive but from my observations I detect a large segment of independent individuals prefer to make up their own minds. Young and old alike half way educated individuals see this as something inevitable. I’ll use this phrase at my own risk! My bet is that the number of individuals who could give one rats ass about what happened to Mr. Kirk is a very small fraction of the U.S. population and here is why.
This guy chose his way in life by his own choice. He sought to agitate for the sake of getting a response, for fame and money! His performance! As per usual in this country sooner or later someone wants to, pardon the pun here, take a shot at someone who makes themselves a target,. Pardon my gallows humor, I digress.
The real moral of this pun-ishing tale, no more apologies, is when one stirs the shit, he often times gets some on himself.
Now he’s made himself a martyr, something his psyche likely drove him to. IMHO he just didn’t ever get his mind right! Maybe Tyler didn’t either!
Charlie got a rush from being a freak IMHO, look where it got him.
Y’all have a nice evening.
“How far down”? In the next weeks or months, we’ll have to wait and see. But, from a longer term perspective: the lecturer says, “If we all work together, we can handle this” – and in the almost empty auditorium, one person whispers in another’s ear: “In other words, we’re hooped'”. Canadian ecologist William Rees introduced me to this term – originally based on railroad work – in the general sense it means what you think it means.
Footage is showing on X and Facebook of Kirk’s security team in the moments leading up to the shooting. They are giving what are very clearly hand signals. Tik Tok is taking down several videos apparently under pressure. The man jumping from the roof has no gun. Patrick Lawrence has pointed out several lies: that T. Robinson turned himself in, that there is significant evidence of Robinson’s leftist ideology, that he supported Netanyahu and as friendly with Ackman, that there is a “domestic terrorist movement in this country” other than Ice or targeting anti-genocide academics and students.
Other questions: who was on C Kirk’s security team? Will they be questioned about the hand signals and checked for dubious affinities. Were there an unusual number of Israeli registered or CIA cell phones close to the event? What will autopsies and ballistics examinations show, and will they be trustworthy, accountable to scrutiny? Was the bullet really from C Robinson’s Mauser? Will Tyler Robinson have good legal representation?
Good questions, Patrick.
I read Max’s article several days ago, and Bibi twice denying he had anything to do with the assassination was very odd. Very odd!
According to Max’s source, Trump was also scared of Bibi and what he might do if he crossed him. And like Charlie, Trump was also tired of Bibi bullying him around. Why doesn’t King Trump tell Bibi to go flip sand? What can the War Criminal do to Trump?
Entering stage left, we have the massive cover-up underway regarding the Epstein blackmail operations. As others have written, Jeffrey was more than a pedophile who trafficked young girls to older men for money. He was also a financial schemer and an international gun dealer. And we’ve also learned that he gathered blackmail material (videotapes) on his clients and young girls. Where are those videotapes he collected over two decades? Were any of them of Trump? Is that why Bibi controls and bullies Trump, and our MAGA King does nothing? How many teenagers did Trump rape?
And, thanks to Pam Martens, we also know how deeply involved JPMorgan Chase was with Epstein. They buried SARs for years to help Epstein and even used their private jet to escort some of the girls to Epstein’s clients. I used to work in Private Banking, and we did cater to the rich, but we were never accomplices to their criminal enterprise. ;)
Oh, and just thinking to myself, why hasn’t Congress brought Tulsi Gabbard in front of them regarding the connection between Mossad and the CIA with Epstein? When the Florida prosecutor was told that Epstein was an “intelligence asset,” that doesn’t mean the FBI. There is no way that Epstein/Maxwell could do what they did for decades with Intel protection. No chance!
As for poor Tyler, will he ever get his day in court? Just to point out the obvious, when did Tyler become gay, or has he always been gay? His partner is a man “transitioning” to a woman. He’s not there yet, which means Tyler is gay. Nobody has even brought that forward in the media. How did Tyler go from a good Mormon boy to a gay assassin?
As Patrick mentioned, all that I hear from the Utah Governor and the media outlets is just tidbits of a story. It’s like they’re making shit up as they go along. Are they taking orders from Stephen Miller?
So. Many. Questions.
‘His partner is a man “transitioning” to a woman. He’s not there yet, which means Tyler is gay. Nobody has even brought that forward in the media.’
I’ve read about that many times, though without your insistence on calling him gay. For instance, ‘Officials have said the unnamed roommate was a “biological male” who was transitioning from man to woman and was in a romantic relationship with the defendant.’ ( bbc.com/news/articles/c7v1rle0598o )
If DJT raped any under age girls … that would have been public years ago. However, Bibi has to go…
What we’ve learned from David Barnea’s (Israel Mossad Director, pager bombings, Iran assasinations, ) handiwork, is that it’s more than likely Pegasus was on Kirk’s iPhone, Stingray listening devices planted in his vehicles/home and imagine the Zionist billionaire / Netanyahu rage after Kirk goes off the ‘Zionist Plantation’ in real time: –>>>Kirk’s iMessage to MTG, Wed. August 27, 8:11pm:
You should speak at Am-Fest!
Would you want to also do a debate about AIPAC etc?
Not with me. No pressure. Well do whatever you want
MTG:
“…Charlie Kirk invited me to speak at Amfest a few weeks ago before he was martyred.
This was after I called for AIPAC to register under FARA and said that the nuclear armed secular government of Israel was committing genocide in Gaza and killing innocent children, Christians, and people…”
Charlie Kirk:
“…The reason we’re doing this focus group, he added, is I have been trying to tell them there is an EARTHQUAKE coming on this issue and in this country, and they don’t believe me. So I’m like, why don’t you just hear it from people themselves…”
As usual, Patrick, beautifully written.!
Some thoughts.
1. Why was the relatively unknown Charlie Kirk murdered?
Most obvious answer. A warning to President Trump. Behave or else!
2. I cannot find a resemblance between Robinson and the pictures of a man leaving the scene.
3. It was reported that the gun used was left away from the site of the shooting. The man leaving does not appear to be carrying a gun.
4. It was not an exceptional feat of marksmanship. A well calibrated sight along with a moderate amount of practice allows you to shoot accurately over the approximately 150m range. Especially if you can rest the gun stock on a fixed surface. Ask any hunter.
Like so much in today’s world the truth will never likely be told.
He was known to the right, and very much so to young right wingers. Of course the centrist MSM ignored him.
It takes a lot of practice to pull off a shot like that. I shot M14 and M16s in the army. Much time is spent zeroing the weapon. I wasn’t expert at it. It appears that the shooter was.
I’m thoroughly unfamiliar with guns, but I gather zeroing is done in advance. The shooter may have been good at it, but that’s hardly impossible.
I beg to disagree. Way back in 1992, the Marine Corps annual rifle qualification test using M-16A2 iron site rifles did not allow for prone (i.e. on your belly) shooting until the shooters were back at the 300 yard line. Then the prone shooters would be required to fire 10 rounds rapidly (1 minute) at a shoulder sized target. Approximately 20% of the Marine shooters could hit 10/10 on their targets at that additional range.
Cliff’s Notes version: Even with only a modicum of rudimentary shooting skills, firing a single 30.06 round from a scoped rifle at 200 yards in a prone position would not be an especially notable achievement.
Is it an established fact that the shooter was a “trained sniper?” Like we were supposed to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was a trained sniper (JFK assassination)?
‘3. It was reported that the gun used was left away from the site of the shooting. The man leaving does not appear to be carrying a gun.’
I’ve only watched one video, once, of the shooter jumping from the roof and running, but that was my impression too.
“4. It was not an exceptional feat of marksmanship. A well calibrated sight along with a moderate amount of practice allows you to shoot accurately over the approximately 150m range. Especially if you can rest the gun stock on a fixed surface. Ask any hunter.”
I firmly agree.
I’m no hunter but I hit the bullseye dead in its centre, at at least that range, the very first time I shot a sniper rifle (I can’t remember what type it was, just we got to shoot old and modern rifles).
I was seated with the gun mounted to a bipod on a table and shown the proper way to hold the stock steady before taking my shot. That was all the setup there was to it.
As a UK resident, I’m only used to air rifles so was pleasantly surprised I’d hit the target exactly where the sight was aiming and at such distance, so I can state from experience the pin-point accuracy of my incedibly novice shot was entirely down to an almost windless day, being shown how to hold the rifle correctly for additional stability and, IMO the most important part, the sight having been properly zeroed in (by the ex military guy leading the shooting course). It didn’t feel like my previous and limited experience with air rifles played any part.
It was shooting a rifle whilst standing that required a level of skill.
Still, I’d at least have to be very confident in my gun skills to go so far as to assassinate someone in such a way and so publicly.
Just thinking of the Israeli possibility, whether it IS true or not: How many conservative commentators will think twice about breaking the line on Israel, knowing there is even a small possibility they killed Kirk? How many now are thinking that they just won’t take the chance?
If Israel is behind this, I would assume that this is the intent. Seeing how hard they struggle to control the media environment and censor if not outright criminalize dissenting groups in the US, UK, and Europe, would it be inconceivable that they send a message that no matter who you are, what political connections you have, step out of line and this can be your fate?
Almost immediately the right wing blogosphere was putting a possible Israel connection out there. Maybe because of a fondness for conspiracy theories plus a residual of real anti-Semitism on the extreme right. Kirk had been totally pro-Israeli govt but did dare to ask some questions. Now, despite the recordings, info keepers on the right are insisting he never wavered. But there was (and still is?) growing dissent among the young right about genocide in Gaza.
Some say Kirk was starting to sour on Israel’s genocide operations. Mileikowski’s (bibi) sudden embrace of Kirk after his death tells me the Zionists are involved.