In The News

Who Killed Charlie Kirk?

by Brother Carlton 
09/26/25
Free to Share
Author requests article critique

  Message Writer
  Hire Writer

Tweet

Earlier today, I read an article by an acquaintance, Bob Moriarty, that left me thinking. The title alone was gripping: "Who Killed Charlie Kirk?" As someone who pays close attention to current events and doesn’t just swallow the official story, I found myself nodding along to parts of it — even if the article raised more questions than answers.

There’s an old saying that truth is the first casualty of war — and lately, it seems truth is the first casualty of any breaking event. With Charlie Kirk’s assassination, much is being said… and much is being dismissed. Official reports point to a lone shooter and label the event as a tragic act of political extremism. But according to Bob Moriarty — and based on a long list of observations and timeline connections he compiled — the story may be far more complex than we're being told.

As Bob lays it out, there appears to be a web of troubling coincidences and tensions, many of them tied to Kirk’s recent falling out with some of his strongest early supporters — notably, individuals and groups aligned with Israeli interests.

Kirk, once seen as one of Israel’s most loyal non-Jewish allies in the American conservative movement, began to show signs of pulling away. He made comments suggesting that Jeffrey Epstein had connections to Mossad. He voiced concern about going to war with Iran on behalf of Israel. He even told President Trump not to get involved in such a war — prompting Trump to reportedly “bark” back at him. Later, Kirk expressed the belief that Israel had too much control over Trump and even called Netanyahu a bully. He began letting anti-Zionist voices speak at Turning Point USA events.

According to Moriarty, Kirk feared for his life. Harrison Smith, a public figure with insider connections, reportedly shared that Kirk worried Israel might try to kill him. Around that time, Netanyahu invited Kirk to visit Israel and offered Turning Point USA substantial funding. But Kirk declined. After that, according to Bob’s timeline, a series of events began to unfold rapidly.

Zionist media outlets turned against Kirk. Donors allegedly threatened to withdraw funding unless he banned certain voices — including Tucker Carlson — from speaking at his events. When Kirk refused to play ball, the attacks intensified. Conservative voices like Laura Loomer publicly accused Kirk of backstabbing Trump. Meanwhile, the director of the FBI’s Utah office was abruptly fired — reportedly by a Zionist-linked FBI official.

Kirk sat down for a tough, even combative, conversation with an Israeli rabbi. He also had a now-infamous interview with Ben Shapiro, in which he expressed anti-Israel views. Shortly afterward, Shapiro attacked Kirk while appearing on Mark Levin’s show.

And then… September 10th.

Footage from that day shows Charlie Kirk apparently being shot in or near the jugular from 200 yards away.  The shot was clean, precise, and professional. Around the same time, an unidentified man was seen in the crowd holding a pistol. Police arrested someone who they claimed was the shooter — but that man screamed “shoot me!” during the arrest. His behavior seemed erratic, possibly staged. A strange propaganda video about him surfaced the very next day — on 9/11.

However, reports surfaced from firearm experts indicating that if the type of gun and ammunition described in the "official story" had actually been used on Charlie Kirdk, the impact would have been devastating, essentially blowing apart his neck or head.  In fact, tests on dummies at a similar range showed that the same type of weapon left almost nothing intact.  This strongly suggests that the official story might not be accurate.

Meanwhile, the man seen on the rooftop fled the scene and hasn’t been found.

Within minutes of the shooting, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tweeted about Kirk. Oddly enough, Israeli media was among the first to officially confirm Kirk’s death. A private jet — just 12 minutes away — reportedly took off shortly afterward. That jet’s location tracker was disabled. Ownership records link the plane to a Chabad Lubavitch donor, according to Moriarty’s sources.

Netanyahu posted again, referencing a supposed “pro-Israel” letter from Charlie Kirk. But Candace Owens, a close associate of Kirk, called the letter a fake and demanded that Netanyahu release the full contents. Tucker Carlson and Mike Cernovich both suggested Kirk had been “at war” with Israeli donors. Then came an exposé from The Grayzone, where a Trump insider reportedly confirmed that Kirk had fallen out with major pro-Israel backers — and that Mossad had even been spying on Trump himself. That same insider cast doubt on the FBI’s version of the story, suggesting that “outside forces” were involved.

On top of all that, strange reports surfaced about visitors who met with the accused shooter days before the attack. They had out-of-state plates. They “didn’t give off a good vibe.” And yet none of their identities have been publicly revealed.

The FBI has said foreign intelligence services are assisting in the investigation. They also claim they have photos of the shooter wearing tactical gear. Yet, no such photos have been released to the public. A makeshift weapon was reportedly found in a wooded area, but no images exist showing the suspect holding it. Still, the media moved quickly to shape the story. Netanyahu, once again, took to the airwaves to blame “Islamists.” Critics saw it as an attempt to steer attention away from any Zionist angle.

All of this — every name, every moment, every shift in tone — was compiled by Bob Moriarty, based on what he understands to be the full record of what happened leading up to and following Charlie Kirk’s assassination. He doesn’t claim to have all the answers. But he insists we pay attention.

And maybe that’s the real point here.

Whether every dot connects or not, conspiracy theorists — the serious ones — serve an important role. They challenge what we’re told. They dig deeper. They refuse to be lulled into sleep by headlines and press conferences.

So no, we may not know who really pulled the trigger. But if we stop asking questions, we may never know.

Let the investigation continue. Let the facts come to light. But let us never assume that the official story is the whole story — especially when it comes to power, politics, and silence that comes too swiftly after a voice is lost.