Who Really Killed Charlie Kirk?

Dear Reader,

As a man of rather morbid curiosity… and as a devoted student of the homicidal sciences… I am monitoring ongoing speculation into the Charlie Kirk slaying.

“Look at this angle. You can clearly see the bullet entering the base of his right ear before exiting the left side of his neck.”

“He was clearly shot from behind. If you look close enough, you can see the blood splatter.”

“He was clearly killed by a hand-held cell phone gun. Check out the guy in the white shirt. He’s obviously aiming it at Charlie. And what were those hand signals all about?”

Here I cite but some examples.

I have observed much of the footage in question.

And I say only that the word “clearly” has undergone an expansive definitional liberalization.

In nearly each instance, if not each instance, the claimed event is very far from clear.

Many — evidently — believe the intelligence services of Israel murdered Mr. Kirk.

That is because the youthful conservative was beginning to entertain doubt concerning Israel’s ongoing operations in Gaza.

Thus they elected to muzzle him.

Mr. Netanyahu has fumed against the accusation. “See,” say the embracers of the Israeli theory, “he doth protest too much. He totally did it.”

Just so. Yet if the fellow laughed off the accusation, would they not shriek, “Why isn’t he addressing it? What’s he trying to hide, huh?”

I hazard they would, yes.

SPONSORED: PARADIGM PRESS

WHITE HOUSE INSIDER BUCK SEXTON:

It could single-handedly reshape the global order… dramatically increase U.S. power… and trigger a massive American market boom the likes of which we haven’t seen in 75 years. Get the details here now.

One fellow believes that Mr. Kirk’s own organization joined the caper — with the possible involvement of his wife and mother of his two toddlers:

Another, evidently, believes Mr. Kirk himself was a conspirator in his own demise:

The author of the comment neglected to account for Mr. Kirk’s suicidal motivations. Yet I let it pass.

What do the ladies and gentlemen under discussion share in common?

They are “conspiracy theorists.”

Such individuals dismiss at once the official accounting of events — be they right — or be they wrong.

If the authorities claim A, they insist, as a reflex, upon B. If the authorities claim X, they jump upon Y without hesitation.

And as I explained earlier in the pages, I am grateful for them… be they right… or be they wrong.

I asked: Are certain conspiracy theories preposterous, debunkable and absurd?

I answered: I believe many conspiracy theories are preposterous, debunkable and absurd.

For example, the theory that Mrs. Kirk conspired in the murder of her husband and father of her offspring.

Or the theory that Mr. Kirk conspired in his own murder.

Yet if a fellow believes it, is he not free to believe it — and to preach it?

Is a fool a criminal? Not under the American system he is not.

Else, 97% of the United States Congress would be behind the bars.

Why do I rise in such vehement defense of the conspiracy theorist?

The answer is because of his ceaseless suspicion.

A suspicious man is an alert man. Thus an alert man is a superior citizen.

Did not Jefferson — Mr. Tommy Jefferson — argue that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty?

He may have said it and he may not have said it. But if he did not say it someone else did say it.

And whoever said it was a very sagacious fellow.

The free society must remain perpetually upon its toes.

And who spends more time upon his toes than the conspiracy theorist?

So the conspiracy theorist at times hallucinates. So he chases phantoms. So he may connect dots that do not in fact connect.

So he is — in many instances — lunatic.

It is no concern. For he offers society that incomparable contribution

Only a suspicious and distrustful people will keep an eye on their government — and if necessary, get their hands on their government.

That, again, is precisely why the conspiracy theorist presents enormous value.

His eyes are perpetually glued to government. They are not glued to his smartphone.

Is government — at times — innocent of the roguery and criminality the conspiracy theorist suspects?

Perhaps at times it is. It may not always and in every instance menace our liberties or deceive us.

Yet the default assumption of a free people must be suspicion that government is always and in every instance a menace to their liberties and a deceiver.

As I have asked before: What is history but a 5,000-year validation of that suspicion?

I do not know who murdered Mr. Kirk.

Yet a man was observed on the rooftop. He was, prior to the shooting, recorded in the prone position common to a gunman.

He was subsequently captured on surveillance camera fleeing the scene.

That man is presently in the custody of police.

I hazard any account of the murder must account for his conduct that day.

Yet again, I do not profess to know what precisely transpired on Sept. 10.

Was he a mere cog in a broader conspiratorial apparatus?

I concede the possibility.

Is he thoroughly innocent of murder? Again, I concede the possibility — though I lean somewhat against it for the reasons listed.

Regardless… today I once again lift a hymn of praise for the conspiracy theorist.

Without him the government would go unwatched, unchecked and unstopped.

The mainstream media will not track its movements so he must.

Be he right… be he wrong… his vigilance is the price he pays for his liberty… and our liberty.

Long may he live!

Regards,

Brian Maher

for Freedom Financial News

P.S. One book can’t make you rich. We all know that.

And I’m not necessarily saying that this book released by President Trump and Robert Kiyosaki will automatically make you rich.

I would never — ever — say that. But…

What you read on pages 33 and 243 alone just could help you get rich.

How?

Go here now for details — and judge for yourself.