I agree with almost everything you say here. Candace Owens says she has the footage of that camera behind Kirk when he was shot. However, on video shared by @manorvillemike below, it does in fact show the Brown Shirt spook moving just as he does in the video in the OP, for whatever that's worth.
Edit: according to Candace Owens, there is no exit (or wound of any kind) on the back of Charlie Kirk's neck after he has been shot. There is no way a .30-06 would not leave an exit wound, nor a 5.56 or other high speed rifle round. They just pack too much energy, as the video shared by @manorvillemike shows when they shoot a ballistic dummy head with and '06, and it literally explodes.
However, that isn't from the entry wound. The entry wound from a .30-06 is .30" across, because the bullet hasn't begun to dump it's energy by deforming and impacting the mass of the target. It is the rapid expansion of bullets after they enter the target that creates a significant wound channel, and exit wounds are much larger than entry wounds for soft pointed hunting ammunition. However, metal jacketed armor piercing ammunition does not expand and create a large wound channel, dumping it's energy in the target, because it is constrained by the metal jacket of the bullet. Full metal jacketed bullets are designed not to deform so that they can penetrate body armor or other impediments and penetrate the target. The exit wound of a jacketed bullet can leave the same size hole it creates on entrance, unlike soft point hunting ammo. Even a much cleaner hole in you than that made by hunting ammunition is a significant wound, and can be fatal if it pierces the right parts.
Only something as small as a .22 rimfire could potentially not leave an exit wound in a target as thin as a human neck. .22LR bullets pass right through rats, for example, and might well pass through a human neck as well, if they didn't impact the spine. I've used .22LR to kill downed cattle, and .22 bullets certainly pass through cow skulls to kill them instantly with a well placed shot right behind the ear. Every high powered rifle round would similarly pass through the neck, and even an armor piercing full metal jacketed round, or a .22 short, would have killed by rupturing the jugular as it did Charlie Kirk's. However, almost every round I can think of would leave an exit wound, passing through the neck - except possibly something as low power as the .22 short.
So full metal, small hole in and small hole out ?
Yes. Soft point hunting ammo has a partially jacketed bullet, with a lead, or other very soft metal, tip. The soft point is so that the bullet deforms and gets very wide, causing it to create as large a wound channel as possible, and dumping it's energy into the target. The jacketed base is to keep the base intact, connected to the mushrooming tip, and doesn't allow the bullet to fragment into many small pieces which are difficult to remove from the meat. A fully jacketed bullet isn't allowed to expand at all, and if it isn't diverted or stopped by bone (or pass through armor), it just passes through the target, making as small an exit hole as the entrance hole.
Edit: I just found information that the bullet has been found. It not exit Charlie Kirk's neck, but was stopped by his spine:
This was posted by someone named Kolvet, that is described as a producer for TPUSA, who was quoting the surgeon that worked on Charlie Kirk after the shooting.
I would certainly concur with the assessment that it is a miracle that the .30-06 bullet didn't create an exit wound. The entire narrative regarding this event is definitely a string of assertions that require believing in miracles.
https://www.sgtreport.com/2025/09/evidences-charlie-kirks-killing-was-a-professional-hit-job/
More incite into the assassination..
Part of above post https://theduran.com/evidences-charlie-kirks-killing-was-a-professional-hit-job/
This is BIG as big as 9/11 if true (and I have little doubt it isn't ) Israel's Mossad and our CIA deep state are behind this. But they are getting sloppy. Looks like an inside job all the way. Right down to his trusted security detail IMO.
Taking out Charlie does 2 things / gets him off Israel's back & divides us more than we are ...
Keep up your good investigating to awaken others //
This is the post on X I wanted to send you first. ~~~ embed:1968415728802976128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1969054789376901189%7Ctwgr%5E61ab8ae26dd55260feb5928ff4f499c76f4d89a2%7Ctwcon%5Es3_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sgtreport.com%2F2025%2F09%2Fmore-evidence-that-tyler-robinson-was-not-the-shooter-but-just-the-patsy%2F twitter metadata:MlNtYXJ0c2tpfHxodHRwczovL3R3aXR0ZXIuY29tLzJTbWFydHNraS9zdGF0dXMvMTk2ODQxNTcyODgwMjk3NjEyOHw= ~~~
Lot of info and thoughts in the tread of this post.
In the pics and video the FBI has released they claim shows Tyler Robinson climbing to the roof and jumping off the roof with a Mauser long action .30-06 scoped rifle, I see no rifle. That lack of a rifle completely disproves the claim Robinson shot Kirk. My belief is that you are correct about Robinson being a patsy to blame to murder of Charlie Kirk on, and that murder was committed by someone else, for completely different reasons, and the FBI appears to be covering for that killer by making false claims that are obviously disproved by the very pics and video they claim are evidence of Robinson's guilt.
I'll have at that link presently.
Same old same old from my gov't since I was born. But now I'm awake and catching on thanks to the internet where you have choices to make better decisions.
Since I don't have an account on X anymore, I can only see the image you linked to, and not the entire thread. It is a convincing piece of evidence that the shot was taken from <100 feet away, and not the >100 yards the FBI has claimed. It strongly suggests that Grandpa's .30-06 could not have been the murder weapon, and Tyler Robinson is not the murderer. Sound travels at specific speeds, and that acoustic analysis is probative the FBI is lying.
I don't know how to interpret that audio data via the graphs he's showing.
The other problem with all of these things is that social media provides motivation to generate content like these audio analysis because it lends credibility to the person posting it resulting in more views.
At the end of the day I can say the same exact thing about Candace Owens really.
Each live-stream she does about Kirk has 3 million views within 10 hours of her doing it.
Not that she shouldn't, but there's real monetary incentives for hanging on to the narrative on almost any of these content creators.
That doesn't discredit them, but it does provide them with this self-serving motive.
And you see that with all of them to some extent. There's a lot of "trying to make this about me" going on using Charlie Kirk's name for SEO.
Sadly the rogue CIA/FBI and you name it agencies are using their power and positions to carry out a diabolic agenda. Who is behind all this satanic madness. Plenty to choose from, starting with people who are rich beyond belief. Rabbit hole leading to other holes. Enjoy your Tuesday
So non-FMJ or ball ammo is actually banned by military use under "war crimes", or so I've been told.
Most guys who shot the M855 or Green Tip 5.56 in combat have said they didn't think of it as a great people-killing round, but that it worked well shooting at people inside of vehicles. The claim was that it would often travel through people.
And yes the soft-expansion of a round into flesh is ideal for causing more damage, but even with FMJ 5.56 the ammo is known to 'tumble'when meeting resistance like flesh.
If something moving fast changes direction there is going to be a lot of energy imparted from that. That's considered a feature of the intermediate rounds as far as I know. There is also papers from the switch from 7.62 NATO that deal with the upsides of the switch including more shots carried by each person.
Better accuracy/less recoil.
But also the doctrine that wounded casualties are preferable to kills because soldiers then have to assist them and get them back to the medical facilities where they become more of a cost on the enemy once again through resources used to heal them.
But that's 5.56, and this is .30-06. Oh and the switch from .30-06 to .308/7.62 NATO I BELIEVE was done assuming .308 was more accurate out at longer ranges, and that was preferable to the extra weight/speed.
The idea of a round with that much weight moving that fast, and not exiting is insane to me. The only partial-explanation I've heard(with no evidence of it) is that he was wearing a possible plate/vest, and the bullet ricocheted off of that into his jugular vein. That's a maybe, but I don't know enough to say that's likely or unlikely.
What I do know is that it was weird for that guy close to Charlie's team to say that Charlie's bones were so strong it stopped the bullet that could have injured other people. I think he called Charlie Superman too.
That's a very weird statement.
Every time we have these monumental events in the USA there is an inherent tendency for us to distrust the official story we are given, but then there's almost always conflicting evidence and testimony followed by all sorts of strange anomalies.
For example: Oklahoma City bombing, 9/11(it's like a labyrinth of rabbit-holes inside of spaghetti), and more recently the Vegas Shooting.
We never get the full picture, but often we also don't have someone who is going to trial. If this kid ends up dead that'll be the final thing I need to say they're lying to us, period. Oh and I almost forget about Epstein, funny that.
You are completely correct in every point.
There is a reason we're subsumed in controversy during these events, and that's because we're ruled by gangsters that use blackmail to control child molesters in political office to profit from our suffering. These events are all committed by that mob for that reason.
It's such a mess with so many factions involved that it's almost impossible to target which one is behind which fuck-up in any given event.
Even Charlie Kirk himself, to me was an instrument of the criminal organizations.
Whether he knew that, or found out later is debatable.
And I do think he did a lot of good, and tried to be real and righteous about his organization's mission.
Of course, lately it's become a lot more acceptable to move off-script for many republicans. Hell, even Tucker Carlson is saying some wild things now.
I don't trust Tucker at all, but sometimes he says things that I think are correct.
And that's part of the problem. There's money to be made massaging the truth, and making sure it doesn't go in a certain direction. You don't even have to lie most of the time, just omit or stay off some subjects.
Charlie's audience is the reason he had to start speaking about some of these things because in most cases we are to the right of the pundits.
Same is true of Tucker. Candace Owens, idk. It's hard to say with her because she says some things that just sound crazy lol.
Every successful lie must contain a kernel of truth. The lack of such kernels has been the cause of the collapse of so many propaganda narratives lately, and I think Carlson has been tasked to recover some of the market by completely reversing himself on 9/11. It's been a generation now, and the fruits of that astounding fraud have been resown and reharvested, the perps mostly dead or still beyond account.
I don't trust anyone, no matter how crazy they sound, because my understanding of the reality extant makes them look staid and respectable. Emmanuel's husband was one of the craziest allegations Candace made, and she's withstood legal challenges to the point where I consider it all but proved true now.
Christian Zionism is what Charlie was paid by Zionists to promote, and his late epiphany and challenging that dogma was, as you point out, necessary to keep TPUSA useful because only psychopathic narcissists were capable of denying that Trump is compromised, Bondi and her groveling toadies Patel and Bongino are blatantly lying about Epstein's operations, and ignoring that threat to the JudeoChristian hasbara had to be addressed or it would be completely disregarded.
But Charlie didn't consider how his own murder could completely obscure it, and that is what is being done. However, any that do not now abandon that dogma don't matter because they're simply incapable of rational thought given the glaring proof it is utterly false. Many former MAGA guys have faced the truth, and Charlie's murder is what has dislodged them from their false belief. Because I think blackmail is one of the most potent mechanisms corrupting America and the West, Kirk's assassination is ripping the cover away because I have never seen such a flimsy plaster as the absolute BS narrative we've been handed about Charlie Kirk's murder in my life.
Again, only psychopathic narcissists could think such feeble Machiavellian tactics couldn't fail, only because their certainty they can't fail is absolute and completely deranged. Anyone capable of independent thought that takes more than a cursory look at the murder cannot fail to see the FBI is full of crap, and the more and longer they look, the more crap they will plainly see. I think this is the clinal boundary that the majority of people will transcend to grasp we are at war and losing because we're depending on our enemy to defend us.
There are polls out that claim most Americans under 30 believe the USA shouldn't be supporting Israel. And that's a very vague, and non-specific way to ask that question.
8 years ago if you talked about this on Youtube, Twitter, etc. you'd be immediately met with claims of antisemitism, and labeled a conspiracy-tard.
But over the past 2 years I think is where I saw things really start change online, and that an also be deceiving because we end up in these echo chambers, but I am seeing this talked about by regular people in mainstream venues now.
There's a theory that Charlie's clip-on microphone detonated or fired a projectile into his neck, and why is that?
Oh because a couple months ago Israel proudly showed the world how they detonated pagers and cell-phones on people they claimed were terrorists.
Then Netanyahu gave Trump a golden pager or cell-phone to "commemorate Israel inventing the cell phone"; which they absolutely did not invent. I don't even know why they would make a claim that's demonstrably false.
If you listen to former CIA agents talk about dealing with Mossad and intel from there they talk about how little they trust them, and how they always leave spy devices behind when they visit the embassies or other buildings. They harass our intel officers and ambassadors in their country as well.
It doesn't sound like an ally at all.
But then the USA has done other things to our allies that aren't quite as bad, but it's the same principle I guess.
This is not wholly organic, although the tendency is. I've seen demonstrations of Goolag altering comment sections of Tubeyou videos such that a couple with differing views each sees a different comment section. Each sees comments aligned with their views and excludes comments presenting differing views. The effect of this granular censorship is to prevent political discussion and the moderation of views on either side that enables agreement. It furthers the division we suffer, and it demonstrates very clearly that division is being constructed. The effect is to prevent a rational synthesis from emerging to effectively oppose Zionism in subject polities.
Kissinger once stated that to be America's enemy was very dangerous, but to be America's friend was fatal. Anyone that has paid attention to the alternating promises and betrayals of the Kurds since Gulf War I under Bush I has seen this happen serially. Where MIGA isn't understood to be the underlying policy of the countries of the West by such allies is when the worst such betrayals are possible. There is also confusion caused by parallel cultures to Rabbinic Judaism/Talmudism, such as the Parsee, Jesuits, and MAGA, not competitors like the Thugee, Roma, or Hashashim, but cryptojews in effect, which I think creates the very pro-Israel current in India, the USA and the EU, and the Ukraine and Russia today.
The Ukraine is a vivid example of these machinations destroying a country(s) and it's people(s) where parallel policies are implemented in all the polities involved creating a covert synthesis that is completely obscured to the different demographics the overt policies are tailored to. However because the political administrations of all the polities involved in the war are all subjugated to Zionists through covert blackmail, none of the policies of the polities have the effect claimed to be intended, but rather work together to achieve the true goals of Zionists, which is to depopulate the Ukraine and acquire the clay with all the economic assets flowing to Jews.
After all, the Ukraine is the real homeland of the Ashkenazim.
Yes I agree, there is no "good side" of the war in Ukraine.
Right wingers in the USA tend to root for Russia, and the left for Ukraine.
The right only roots for them because they believe the idea that Putin is some anti-globalist warrior for Christianity. It's false, and easily seen through if you simply look into his ties to the same sect of Judaism that Trump is tied to.
They always operate this way.
The voice in the ear of the king.
While I understand where you are coming from pointing to their "divide and conquer" tactics in most nations; I don't agree that it's quite that simple.
Yes, the left & right in the USA share criticism of our Zionism problem, but there is little that we can agree about when it comes to home.
Both sides of our political system are shadow-puppets, and they do enact little wins for their constituents here and there. Both sides lose overall.
But the right in particular, has remained largely consistent on it's political plans(the people, not the politicians).
Whereas Biden and the Clintons are to the right of Trump if you simply go back in history.
The right has identified the true threat to all nations: demographic atomization and replacement.
This is why the left has always called them racist, and demonized nationalism while associating it with Fascism/National Socialism(ironic since, socialist).
National Socialism agrees with a lot of the left's economic prescriptions, but only on the basis of a nation. With nation being based in ethnos as per it's original definitions.
The left invites foreign people into the nations, and then empowers them through their own ethnic grievances against the native nationalists or even populist nationalists.
The reason they do this is because when you have a 90% white nation you do have to divide them politically to hamstring them.
But once that number is 60% divided into 30% halves, and then there's 16% Latino base, and 13% black base; the divisions will start to occur naturally.
They speak different languages, and no longer share a culture.
The internet itself has largely destroyed cultures seemingly around the world.
There's also the fact that revolutions in nations are often affected by a minority. That doesn't have to mean an ethnic minority, but even ideological.
It could be focused around language even.
This is why the left and right cannot really work together against Zionism.
Both sides are pro in the govt, and the people want outcomes that are mutually exclusive to one another domestically.
Only in the past 5 years have white people started to express an identity as such though. Because for most of the time they have been fighting against the claims they are racist for looking out for their own interests in their own nations.