The Charlie Kirk Assassination: Questions, Contradictions, and the Battle for Narrative Control
According to the FBI's official account, Tyler Robinson fired a .30-06 round from approximately 150 meters, striking Charlie Kirk in the neck. But this narrative immediately raised questions among firearms experts and independent investigators. The wound profile simply doesn't match what ballistics experts would expect from such a powerful round at that distance.
Nate Cornacchia, a retired Green Beret from 1st Special Forces Group with 10 years in Army Special Forces, provided a detailed ballistics analysis that challenges the official narrative. According to Cornacchia, a .30-06 round hitting soft tissue in the neck should cause catastrophic damage.
His expert assessment: the idea that Kirk would have any neck left after a direct hit from such ammunition defies basic ballistics science.
Perhaps the most significant development came when Candace Owens obtained access to previously unreleased footage. In her recent video ( Ep 239 ), Owens revealed a crucial detail that challenges the entire official narrative: she saw no blood whatsoever on the back of Charlie Kirk's head or neck.
This observation is critical. If Kirk was indeed shot with a .30-06 round from the front-as claimed, the exit wound should have been massive and clearly visible. The absence of blood behind his head (exit wound), from such a large and powerful round are high anomalies.
Owens gained access to this footage through her connections within Kirk's circle. When she reached out to the individual who removed the camera equipment from the scene immediately after the shooting, they claimed they were preserving evidence for federal agencies.
The Missing Bullet Mystery
The FBI's admission that they haven't found the bullet is perhaps the most telling detail. With a .30-06 round, the projectile should be easily recoverable—these bullets don't simply vanish.
The Broader Pattern
Kirk's assassination didn't occur in a vacuum. According to claims made by Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, and others, Kirk was being pressured by major donors to stop platforming certain guests like Tucker Carlson. Multiple sources, including Roger Stone and Matt Gaetz, have publicly confirmed these accounts that major donors enacted a type of intervention just prior to Kirk’s death - to strong arm him into to straying from what seemed like Kirk growing criticism of the state of Israel.
Character Assassination: Almost immediately after Owens began sharing her findings, a coordinated effort emerged to discredit her credibility and connection to Kirk. On Patrick Bet-David's podcast, Eric Bolling made allegedly false claims about Owens' relationship with Turning Point USA, stating he hadn't seen her since 2015 and implying she had no recent association with the organization.
This was easily debunked. Owens remained listed on Turning Point USA's official website under "Our Team" even after Kirk's death. She had toured with the organization multiple times throughout 2024 and maintained an active friendship with Kirk, evidenced by text message exchanges she later released showing recent communications.
The attempt to portray Owens as a disgruntled outsider with no insider knowledge served a clear purpose: if she had no real connection to Kirk or Turning Point, then her claims about donor pressure, Kirk's fears for his life, and the suspicious footage could be dismissed as fabrications from someone seeking attention.
The speed and coordination of this character assassination campaign raised its own questions. Why work so hard to discredit someone unless her information posed a genuine threat to the official narrative?
Full video at:
DailyRabbitHole.Substack.com