Cui Bono | Who Wanted Charlie Kirk Killed?

Uncovering every lead and watching the reaction closely by his compatriots, today we dive deeper behind Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the explosive possibilities. Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson reveal unsettling pressures Kirk faced, while the FBI’s lone gunman narrative raises suspicions. Dive into the evidence, from Netanyahu’s alleged influence to Epstein file cover-ups, that’s shaking conservative media. Join us as we demand justice for Kirk and question who really wanted him silenced. Get you some cozy with promo code lockdown at https://www.mypillow.com/ Check out my show over on Fountain: https://www.fountain.fm/show/nUTYcMtl4yMuoKHljZWu Become a supporting member of Liberty Lockdown here!: https://libertylockdown.locals.com/ This is where I do monthly AMA's for supporting members only Super valuable stuff! Twitter: https://twitter.com/LibertyLockPod Pickup LL shirts over at https://www.toplobsta.com/products/ll-lakers?_pos=5&_sid=e7319ba4a&_ss=r&variant=40668064186434 NEW DESIGNS JUST DROPPED All links: https://www.libertylockdownpodcast.com/ Linktree: https://linktr.ee/libertylockdown As always, if you leave a five star review on Apple Podcasts with your social media handle I'll read it on next weeks show (audio version only)! Love you long time Liberty Lockdown presents a variety of opinions, sometimes opposing and controversial. They are not representative of the host of the podcast. Guests are encouraged to express their opinions in a safe and equitable environment.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
I totally understand, and I think Iran's really bad, but
a war with Iran is not, you know, is something
that could really.

Speaker 2 (00:07):
Hurt our country.

Speaker 1 (00:07):
I mean, boy, that was an unpopular position. Spray didn't
need to express it. I cannot overstate the amount of
attacks he took privately over this, like absolutely for real,
And having lived in Washington most of my life and
seeing people run nonprofits, I've never met one who was
willing stand up is too strong. He wasn't confrontational, but

(00:28):
he would just say no, I'm sorry that you feel
that way, but I think this is the right thing.
The people we represent, which is mostly young people, they
believe this, and I believe it also. It was it
was brave but loving at the same time. And I'm
not sure he made a lot of headway by the way.
I mean, I think he made real enemies in doing that.

Speaker 3 (00:46):
Before I get started to day, I want to kind
of address some of the responses that I got to
my interview of Harrison Smith. First off, you know, fifteen
sixteen thousand people have watched it so far, and I
think there's been five hundred commons and maybe two that
were negative, So by and large, I think people understand
my motivations in this, but I want to make them
explicit for those that are questioning why I'm doing this

(01:09):
and what I'm doing here. So today's episode is going
to be unpacking who had motivations to take Charlie Kirk's life,
and I'm going to try and look from a purely
investigatory standpoint. It's important that we keep an open mind
and we acknowledge that there are many people who had

(01:30):
motivations to see Charlie Kirk killed. So that's what I'm
doing now, taking this down to a personal level. I
had only met Charlie Kirk I think twice, didn't know
him very well at all, hardly at all, so this
is not like a personal matter to me in that regard. However,
I do view him as a colleague. I view him

(01:51):
as someone who walked in the same footsteps or the
same path that I am currently. And while certainly his
ohs were much bigger than mine in terms of following
and reach and everything else, and duration that he had
been doing it, he had been doing it for thirteen years.
I've been doing it for five now, so he's miles
ahead of me. And I'm not trying to you know,
put myself up on his level by any stretch, But

(02:14):
I am saying I still viewed him as a colleague,
and perhaps even more importantly, I view him as a
kind of Canarian the coal mine for the dangers that
people that I really do know in this industry well
and love could be jeopardized if justice is not found
rapidly on behalf of him and his family. So well,

(02:37):
you know, primary concern obviously is justice for Charlie Kirk.
It's justice for his family, for his children, who, by
the way, worst story I think, like the thing that
finally tipped me over into tears was hearing that his children,
who were present at the assassination ran towards him during
it because they were scared of the gunshots. And that's

(02:59):
I mean, it's just too much. It's too much to
even consider, it's too much to think about. But so yes,
number one, justice for him and his family. That's paramount. Additionally,
it's very perilous times for people in my world. You know,
I'm very good friends with Dave Smith and Temple. Dave

(03:19):
Smith has been circulating in this narrative, this conversation, especially
those that believe that Charlie Kirk's life was taken as
a consequence of him allegedly turning against Israel and Charlie
having Dave Smith at a turning point USA event to
debate against Josh Hammer as to whether or not Israel

(03:41):
is our greatest ally or I'm not exactly sure what
the topic was. I did watch the debate and allegedly,
like the biggest inflection point in terms of this is
what Candice Owens is saying Cernovich others. I'm gonna show
you the receipts so you'll don't have to take my
word for it that he had been his opinion had
been shifting, as evidenced by also, just days prior to

(04:02):
the attack, his interview with Ben Shapiro where he's asking
fairly challenging questions about America and Israeli relations.

Speaker 2 (04:10):
I'm going to unpack all that.

Speaker 3 (04:12):
Let me just start by saying, it's not as if
I'm convinced by any stretch of the imagination that Israel
is responsible for this. I do believe strongly that they
could have an incentive to want to see him dead,
and I do think that regardless of whether or not
they were involved, they are responding in a way in
which they are taking advantage of the circumstances. The situation

(04:33):
similar to whether or not you believe nine to eleven
was an inside job. There was still obvious capitalization by
entities within our government and foreign governments to get us
to do things that we otherwise would not have done,
and we're not to our benefit in the moment of
crisis and in the aftermath therein. And I feel like
that's a very similar thing that's happening today passing additional

(04:56):
laws against bds, etc.

Speaker 2 (04:57):
Etc.

Speaker 3 (04:58):
We're going to unpack all that. There's a lot to
cover here. However, let me start by saying there's a
distinct possibility that the FBI narrative is accurate, that in fact,
the man who is accused or alleged to have taken
Charlie Kirk's life acted alone, and he's a lone lunatic.
The latest reporting this morning is that he was shacked

(05:20):
up with some male to female transitioning person and maybe
that's all the motivation in the world he needed.

Speaker 2 (05:28):
I don't know. You don't know either.

Speaker 3 (05:31):
So for those that are upset that I'm asking questions
about this story, that I'm trying to get to the
truth that I'm really interested in justice on this. This
may not be the episode for you. I am sincere
in my desire to find out the truth about this.
It matters a fuck of a lot. So if you

(05:51):
think that I'm using this for any nefarious purposes, that
I'm trying to cast dispersions towards Israel unnecessarily, that is
not what's happening. I am genuinely interested in the truth,
and I am genuinely interested in trust justice. And I
apologize for the lengthy monologue to open this episode, but
I think it's really important that people understand where I'm

(06:11):
coming from on this, because I do not want to
make false accusations. I don't, but I do want to
know the truth, and I do not trust the FBI,
and I do not trust the government to give us
those answers.

Speaker 2 (06:23):
Correct. Yes, yes, So.

Speaker 4 (06:27):
When he's first spotted on campus, he has different clothing on,
and then he changes clothing on the roof and then
changed back into that clothing at some point, so that
when when he was when he was apprehended, when he
when he was arrested, the clothing matched the clothing he
had on before the shooting here at UVU.

Speaker 3 (06:47):
So it is incumbent upon me and those in my
industry and you at home to do the work to
find out what really happened and to not accept just
you know, cookie cutter handed to you narratives as if
they're the gospel, because they're probably not. As we've seen,
they've already taken in multiple people into custody and then
released them in the first first day, so that could

(07:09):
be a similar situation here.

Speaker 2 (07:11):
We don't know yet.

Speaker 3 (07:11):
I'm going to unpack everything for you, and I want
you to decide for yourself. If you think that I'm
grasping its straws, fine, come to that conclusion. I'm okay
with that. Until then, I'm going to keep digging, and
for those that are interested in that, let's go along
for the journ So, just so you understand how I
analyze things, I tend to start with the official narrative

(07:32):
and then I work backwards from there. So if the
official narrative satisfies me as to its accuracy, I don't
really have to work much backwards because I've already been
convinced that, yes, this does look adequate. Like if you have,
for instance, the episode I did three or four days
ago with the poor girl who got attacked by that
man on the train. I'll just leave it at that.
You don't need to convince me as to what happened there.

(07:54):
Video evidence kind of an open and closed case. Right
With this it is much much more convoluted. And I
still think that it's important though, that we start with
the official narrative and mel village crazy lady on X.
Don't let her handle fool it. She actually does really
good investigative work. This is her recap of what we

(08:14):
know so far. This is as of about noon today.
The story right now is that Robinson drove his vehicle,
a Great Dodge Challenger, onto campus at eight twenty nine am.
He parked his vehicle on campus, He gets out of
his vehicle on campus wearing completely different clothes, and he
then disappears for three hours and twenty minutes until he
re emerges off campus on a ring doorbell from a

(08:36):
neighborhood next to campus at eleven forty nine am. At
this point, he's wearing a totally new outfit, having changed
everything including his shoes, and he's now walking with a gate,
presumably because he has a rifle shoved down his pants
and a backpack on his back. I'm not going to
show the footage, but there is footage. It looks like
from a ring doorbell, as she says, and he's walking
what looks like with a limp or like with a

(08:57):
stiff leg, and allegedly we have to assume that that's
because he had the rifle down his pants, which is
a really suspicious way to do this, she continues. He
crosses back on a campus at eleven fifty am, goes
up the stairs of a parking garage at eleven fifty
three am, where we again lose track of him until
twelve oh two. He enters the Lossy Center building, which

(09:18):
is a large student center, and hangs out for thirteen minutes,
presumably with the giant rifle down his pants, and then
climbs the stairs towards the roof at approximately twelve fifteen.
At twelve twenty two, he gets into the prone position,
flat on his stomach, on the corner of the roof
of the building, directly across from where Kirk was speaking.
At twelve twenty three, he fires a single shot that
hits Kirk. He then immediately gets up and runs across

(09:39):
the rooftop to the far south corner where he flings
something to the ground which looks like a backpack, and
he then jumps off the roof, picks up the bag,
and runs back across the road and into a wooded
area that backs up to the neighborhood adjacent to the
first neighborhood he emerged from in the ring doorbell at
forty nine am. This is where he's a gun. He
then disappears again. He does, however, return to his vehicle,

(09:59):
which is presumab he still parked on campus, and then
drives it home two hundred and fifty miles away. We
know this because news reports note the car and the
family driveway after his arrest. What else do we know, Well,
according to Fox News, there's reports that he was shacked
up with a male to female transitioning man, woman whatever.
I don't know, and that could be his motivation. So

(10:20):
you have all of the unusual information when it comes
to the events of that day, including the fact that
if you look at the footage of him jumping from
the rooftop, it is not evident that he's carrying a rifle.
It's not impossible that he was carrying it, but it's
a large gun and I don't see it personally, so
it looks to me like a bag. The narrative from

(10:43):
the FBI is that it's a gun covered in a towel,
because that's how they discovered it in the woods. Well,
it doesn't. It looks like it's floppy. It does not
look stiff like a gun. I've been around guns. It
doesn't look as if he's got the gun when he
jumps off that roof. Very very odd. So setting that aside,
just take for a second that, in fact, that is

(11:05):
the firearm. And then he, despite fleeing with it, he
then ditches it in the woods, which is a weird
thing to do because why would you do that?

Speaker 2 (11:13):
But also he dishes his car.

Speaker 3 (11:15):
But then he comes back to his car, So he
comes back to the scene of the crime, gets into
his vehicle, drives a couple hundred miles home, and then
confesses to his father. After some dispute and debate with
his dad, he ends up turning himself in. His dad
was like a sheriff, and his dad calls their pastor,
and I guess they convince this guy to turn himself in.

Speaker 2 (11:37):
That's the story.

Speaker 3 (11:38):
So he pulls off this kind of miraculous and this
is all setting aside the fact that there's a lot
of mixed reporting. I've seen coverage and close people to
Charlie Kirk's circle who say that, yes, he did have
body armor on. But then I look at the photos
and it doesn't look to me as if he has
body armor on. He's got a very thin shirt on,
and I would see it most likely if it's the

(12:00):
most low profile armor you've ever seen in your life.
I can't show you this, unfortunately, because it would get
this video pulled down. But there is slow motion footage
of the attack, and in it there is immense compression
that ripples across his T shirt that looks as if
there's body armor on. So that's why I thought that

(12:21):
there was, and I think that's what I told Harrison
when I had him on, is that I thought that
the bullet hit the surface area just at the tip
of the body armor that would not have enough surface
area to actually stop the round, but instead redirected it
which tragically entered his neck. So again, maybe that's what happened,
maybe it isn't. But what I'm saying is I'm setting

(12:42):
all of that aside, all of the weirdness with that
the fact that this guy, Oh, by the way, his
grandma says, he's never own a firearm.

Speaker 2 (12:48):
Okay, odd.

Speaker 3 (12:50):
He also comes from a very conservative family, seems like
a decent kid until a few years ago, and then
is radicalized to doing something like this. Now, all of
that's possible. I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm just saying,
is are you satisfied with the story so far? I
personally am not.

Speaker 2 (13:08):
Now.

Speaker 3 (13:08):
I think there's probably a fifty to fifty chance that
that that's all accurate, that in fact, he will acted alone.
And you know, maybe he had some people through discorder
whatever that he was orchestrating with, and hopefully they'll be
rounded up and prosecuted too. But in terms of like
not there being a bigger plot, intelligence agency involvement, nefarious
things to that nature, maybe maybe I don't know. I'm

(13:29):
not going to say that that's not true. I just
don't know. So this is the reason I'm digging deeper.
This is the reason I'm looking for additional people with motivations.
And let's be honest, there are a lot of people
that have motivations. So let's start with the basic ones.
These are the questions that Charlie Cook asked of Ben
Shapiro the day before his assassination, Make of it what
you will.

Speaker 5 (13:46):
So we're on team civilization here. We want to see
the maniacs of Hamas be defeated. So we've seen news
this morning that quite honestly, I'm a little confused by,
and I was hoping you could navigate it and help
us understand, which is that Israel bombed Qatar, which houses
a lot of Hamas officials.

Speaker 2 (14:06):
What happened here? And if I were to introduce.

Speaker 5 (14:08):
Just this skeptical question, will this potentially endanger America's own
interest in the Middle least? So please, Ben, help me
better understand the situation. I just spent time in Japan,
and one of the things that kind of looms over
Japan is that Japan they engage in an unconditional surrender,
that they said we're done and they laid down their arms,

(14:31):
obviously after the two tomic bombs. Very controversial. People have
mixed opinions on it. I certainly do, But that is
unconditional surrender. Is that what Israel is aiming for here?
I suppose that is a question that I get a
lot on campus. What does success look like? Because I
think we could all agree a long war is not
good for Israel, a long drawn out war, and we're

(14:53):
now ending, we're coming towards two years in about a month,
so it's been about twenty three months. So what does
ultimate success look like in the Gaza strip? What other
feedback or criticism would you have about this situation. I
know that it's impossible for anyone to listen to everything

(15:13):
that you ever say, but looking at this from a
American perspective, what else would you say things could have
been handled differently? Maybe on the pr front, maybe also
just on a conduct front. Where would you say, as
an outsider, things that could have been handled better, more efficiently,
or with more precision. A claim I receive often, and

(15:37):
we're starting our campus tour tomorrow is that Israel is
committing genocide. How do you respond to that? Though, author
that Ben she your author of Lions and Scavengers, are
going to get that in a second. I have one
or two other questions and Israel I think it's very
important for audience to hear this though, because there is
an incessant campaign and one thing a friends send to me, interestingly,

(16:01):
which is okay, Charlie, we pushed backed against the media,
on COVID, on lockdowns, on Ukraine, on the border. So
maybe we should also ask a question, is the media
totally presenting the truth when it comes to Israel?

Speaker 2 (16:14):
Just a question?

Speaker 5 (16:14):
You know that maybe we shouldn't believe everything the media says,
because I know I've been conditioned to ask a lot
more critical questions over the last couple of years. So, Ben,
some people would accuse Israel of wanting to ethnically cleanse.
Some people in the Israeli government are saying again, it's
all over the place, right, you have opinions all over.
In your opinion, what would a good outcome five years

(16:36):
from now be, and how does one respond to the
claims of ethnic cleansing. We're running out of time here,
But just last question on this, Ben. I know this
might be a tougher question, but Bbie said, quote, I
didn't like what you said this.

Speaker 2 (16:52):
I'll be honest.

Speaker 5 (16:53):
You can't be maga if you're anti Israel. I don't
like it for a couple of reasons. How did you analyze.

Speaker 2 (16:58):
That statement from me?

Speaker 6 (17:00):
And it is totally fine to stay to people who
wish to destroy our civilization know your values suck and
they don't belong here.

Speaker 5 (17:06):
Where does all this resentment come from.

Speaker 3 (17:19):
Here's what Ben Shapiro and Mark Levin had to say
three days before the attack.

Speaker 7 (17:23):
We you and I have people who we thought were
conservatives sound a lot like the Marxist Islamis who were attending.

Speaker 2 (17:30):
This event last week, don't they. I think it's exactly right.

Speaker 6 (17:34):
Unfortunately, there's a grievance culture that has become the dominant
strain on the left that says that all people in
the world who are poor, who have bad lives, that
is the fault of the West, that is the fault
of Israel, It's the fault of capitalism, it's the fault
of the Jews, it's the fault of anyone except for themselves.
They have no agency, and thus all the systems must
be torn down from the rooftops all the way down

(17:55):
to the ground. And you see that sort of mirrored
on a weird horseshop part of the right that is
now our doing sort of the same thing. That the
problem is that people have are intractable, that there's a
shadowy group that's manipulating all of this, that America actually
was never great, America was wrong in World War Two,
America never landed on the moon, and these kind of
two forces are now bizarrely joining hands in the middle.

Speaker 2 (18:15):
It's very strange.

Speaker 7 (18:16):
Do you think there's enough of an effort to push back.
They sort of sprinkle these events with these kooks. They
sprinkle these events with these American haters who claim to
be American firsters and are fake MAGA and even stab
the president in the back.

Speaker 8 (18:32):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (18:32):
I mean, I think it's definitely an attempt by some
of these organizations to quote unquote maintained the big tents.
But the reality is that, as many have said, the
problem with a big tents is that you may end
up with many, many clowns inside. And the most fundamental
thing is that just because you're saying somebody votes Republican,
that does not mean that they ought to be the
preacher at the front of the church. They're not the
person who ought to be leading the movement if they

(18:53):
are spending all day criticizing the presidents of the United
States as covering up a Masad rape ring or being
a tool of these Raelies for hitting in Irani a
nuclear facility. I think he has said literally his entire
career that he was going to do.

Speaker 3 (19:06):
Now here's what Candice Owens had to say about some
of Charlie's alleged friends and their response after the attack.

Speaker 9 (19:12):
I think, yeah, in the end, Charlie, Charlie was going
through spiritual transformation. I don't think it, I know it.
He was going through a lot, and there was a
lot of pressure. And it's hard for me to watch
the people who were pressuring him. I don't know, just
say the things that they're saying, you know. I just
there's something about it that just feels really fake. Feels

(19:34):
really fake to me. And they would have allowed him
to lose and wanted him to lose everything for changing
or even slightly modifying an opinion, and then to see
them doing what they're doing today, it's hurtful to me.
It's very heartful to me.

Speaker 3 (19:51):
Now here's what Erica Kirk, Charlie's wife, had to say
just last night.

Speaker 10 (19:55):
The evildoers responsible for my husband's assassination have no idea
what they have done. They killed Charlie because he preached
a message of patriots's faith and of God's merciful love.

Speaker 8 (20:08):
They should all know this.

Speaker 10 (20:09):
If you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before,
you have no idea You have no idea what you
just have unleashed across this entire country, in this world.
You have no idea. You have no idea the fire
that you have ignited within this wife, The cries of
this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.

Speaker 3 (20:33):
So let me start by saying, unbelievable courage on behalf
of Erica. I am I was floored again, close to tears.
I didn't actually cry that time, but very close. I
can't believe her resolve. And it's evident that Charlie and
she are were kindred spirits. They absolutely carried that same
warrior spirit in their heart. And she honors his legacy

(20:56):
by her reaction and her response. So God bless her truly.
But there's a very important oddity in what she had
to say there, because this is after the assailant, the
alleged assailant had already been taken into custody, and also
after the FBI had already confirmed that he worked alone.
They were adamant, So why did she say evil doers? Look,

(21:20):
it could be a benign thing as simple as she's
referencing the people who painted her husband as this homophobic,
misogynistic racist, whatever, and she's bundling them all up along
with the person who actually pulled the trigger. Maybe or
maybe she doesn't think that the person that they have

(21:40):
in custody worked alone, and that, in fact, the evil
doers that she's talking about is specifically about a plot
against her husband's life. I think she would probably know.
I don't know if she would like specifically who did it,
but I think she would have. I mean, she had
a very close relationship with her husband by all accounts,
I would imagine that if he was under pressure, as
many people including Mike Cernovich and Kendis Owans are reporting,

(22:03):
that she would be privy to the pressures that he
was languishing under. So what were those pressures? Well, according
to Kennis Owens and Cernovic, they're billionaire funders that were
applying massive pressure against Charlie Kirk specifically after the Turning
Point USA event, and it was not much to my
relief about platforming Dave Smith, my friend, but rather Tucker Carlson.

(22:28):
Apparently the pressure against Charlie Kirk got turned up to
eleven right after that event because they had Tucker Carlson
on in which basically every person who went on there
from Megan Kelly, to Dave Smith, to Tucker Carlson, there
were a few others. They all were talking about Israel
because at the time, the biggest story in the country,

(22:50):
as it should have been, was the fact that the
Epstein files were not being released, that the cover up continued,
and also, obviously Dave was there to debate about Israeli
American relation and whether or not there are top ally
and blah blah blah. So point being, that's not what
they want to see. They don't want to have Charlie Kirk,
who has been funded by large Zionist donors for years,

(23:14):
probably since its inception, I don't know exactly when, but
they don't want to have that being the topic of discussion.

Speaker 2 (23:20):
Makes sense, you're putting your money there.

Speaker 3 (23:22):
You don't want to have that being a conversation that
gets popularized at the highest levels. And you certainly don't
want to have Tucker Carlson, who's got such gravitas that
anything he says there is going to go super viral,
and you don't want to.

Speaker 2 (23:33):
Be funding it. I get that.

Speaker 3 (23:35):
I respect that, and maybe that's all it is. Maybe
they just didn't like it, and they were threatening to
pull funding as a consequence of him putting on Tucker Carlson, And.

Speaker 1 (23:44):
I think the real answer is Jeffrey Epstein was working
on behalf of Intel Services, probably not American, and we
have every right to ask on whose behalf was he working.
How does a guy go from being a math teacher
at the Dalton School in the late set he's with
no college degree to having multiple airplanes, a private island,
and the largest residential house in Manhattan. Where did all

(24:09):
the money come from? And no one has ever gotten
to the bottom of that because no one has ever tried.
And moreover, it's extremely obvious to anyone who watches that
this guy had direct connections to a foreign government. Now
no one's allowed to say that foreign government is Israel
because we have been somehow cowed into thinking that that's naughty.

(24:31):
There is nothing wrong with saying that. There is nothing
hateful about saying that.

Speaker 3 (24:36):
Well, the story goes a little bit deeper than that.
First off, Charlie Kirk refuses to no longer invite Tucker
Crass into his events, and God bless him for that.
I think Tucker Cross is great and I'm glad to
hear that he stood strong on that as a consequence,
though he had already lost many of his donors and
he was facing basically his one final major donor withdrawn

(25:00):
as a consequence. Well, who steps into the gap there? Well,
according to the Gray Zone their reporting, that broke yesterday
or maybe it was two days ago. Now bib Net,
Yahoo actually reaches out to Charlie Kirk specifically and offers
to bankroll TPOSA and Charlie Kirk. Okay, So you have
Charlie Kirk, who has been one of the biggest advocates

(25:22):
and proponents for this Judeo Christian values mindset and Christian
Kirk conservatism being aligned with Israeli interests, and he's.

Speaker 2 (25:31):
Been doing that for a very long time.

Speaker 3 (25:33):
I was actually very harshly critical of Charlie Kirk for that,
because I genuinely believe in America first, and he always
included Israel in that moniker that Israel's was also a
major priority for us.

Speaker 2 (25:44):
I've never understood it. I've always disagreed with it.

Speaker 3 (25:46):
However, as you can tell by the questioning of Ben Shapiro,
as you can tell by the fact that he's platforming
Meg and Kelly, who's now questioning these things openly and
they actually had a conversation. Between Charlie and Megan.

Speaker 5 (25:57):
It goes to the point where if, for example, if
I have less ability sometimes online to criticize the Israeli
government about backlash than actual Israelis do, and that's really
really weird, isn't it.

Speaker 2 (26:12):
Meghan, that's not right, wrong headed.

Speaker 11 (26:15):
I'll tell you this for me. So I got some
blowback after saying Masad possibilities with Epstein, a comment behind
which I stand. I mean, I realized and I've of
course reported what Alan Dershowitz has said.

Speaker 12 (26:26):
As his lawyer.

Speaker 11 (26:27):
He says, I think he would have told me he
didn't say he had any of those connections. I hear
all that. That doesn't mean it's not true. I think
all these things should be explored. It's one of the
many things that should be explored around Epstein. But saying
that and also saying he might be a US asset, etc.
Doesn't make you anti Semitic.

Speaker 3 (26:43):
So you've got Charlie and Meghan lamenting the fact that
to have any conversation or any criticism of Israel whatsoever
is now putting them on the outside, and they're receiving
this same bombardment of hate and maybe threats, we don't know, terrified, scared,
you know, fearful. These are the things that start to
be said about them. And then you have Harrison Smith,
who was on the show just yesterday and he's talking

(27:05):
about how he wasn't talking to me about it. He
posts this publicly saying that there is someone in Charlie
Kirk's enter circle that says he is afraid, he's fearful
for his life, that Israel will kill him if he
turns against them. He said this a month before the attack,
So that's odd. Just maybe it's nothing, and it could

(27:27):
be maybe it is, I don't know. But then you
have the Gray Zone reporting just yesterday or two days
ago that confirms once again there's yet another insider, which
by the way, Max Blumenthal, who is I don't know
if he's the top guy at the Gray Zone, but
he's been associated with them forever. Max has also been
on the show. I consider him a friend. I've done

(27:48):
live events with him. Good guy. His bias is enormous.
He's a Jewish dude, but he's also very anti Zionist.
He's very opposed to Israel's actions and he wears that
on his sleeve. So his bias is why right out
in the open. He was on with Tim Dillon today
in which he is talking about how Donald Trump and

(28:09):
Charlie Kirk feared for their lives because of specifically Israel
and BBNT in Yahoo, there's.

Speaker 13 (28:15):
The President of the United States fear for his life.

Speaker 3 (28:22):
Yes, and in that this is the really interesting thing.
And I've been talking to Harrison about this. I'm not
going to give any more details because I don't want
to violate our privacy. But I was curious if because
I don't know who Harrison was talking to. I don't
that's the truth and he's not. I didn't want him
to disclose it to me. I don't even know if

(28:42):
I want to know. But I was curious if because
that report from the Gray Zone broke and I saw
it yesterday for the first time, and I read it
and I was like, Wow, this confirms exactly what Harrison
Smith was saying a month ago.

Speaker 2 (28:54):
I wonder if it's the same. Insider.

Speaker 3 (28:56):
Well, I got a little bit of insight into that
today when Max Blumenthal told Tim Dillon this.

Speaker 13 (29:01):
Did you get the feeling that he was only afraid
of reputational damage or you know, losing money or did
his fears extend to his life.

Speaker 12 (29:16):
Well, that's what Harrison Smith, who is a personality at
info Wars, the pro Trump outlet, has said, based on
a source.

Speaker 2 (29:24):
He spoke to.

Speaker 12 (29:25):
I don't know him, I don't know what source he
spoke to. But he said this on August thirteen, so
almost a month before Charlie Kirk was killed. He said,
Charlie Kirk fears that Israel will kill him if he
continues ahead.

Speaker 3 (29:40):
So it's important to note that, well, Max Blumenthal had
an inside source that was saying this. He mentions Harrison Smith,
but he doesn't say that it's the same source. Now,
that doesn't mean that it's not, and it doesn't mean that, like,
he may not even know who Harrison's source is. So
if they both have the same source and that source
is lying, well then they're both wrong, right. But there's

(30:01):
also the possibility that they are both working off of
different sources, and which means that you have independent confirmation
of insiders in the White House who are both saying
the same thing, which means we have real confirmation that
this is true. So we still don't know. Just cut
to the chase. We still don't know for sure, But
I'll tell you, if Max Blumenthal and Harrison Smith want

(30:23):
to get on the phone and talk about who their
sources are and do it in confidence with one another,
we could actually come to a real conclusion here, because
if it turns out they're both working off of different
sources and they're both being told the exact same thing,
well then that's pretty much an open and shutcase that yes,
this is what's happening, and this is where the story
gets really concerning, And this is where regardless of how
you feel about Israel, maybe you are pro Israel and

(30:45):
you think that the Palestinians deserved to be wiped off
the map. Maybe you're one of those folks. I'd be
surprised if you're watching me. But God Bless welcome aboard. Well,
are you comfortable with the fact that if their reporting
is accurate, which I tend to believe it is, because
despite the fact that Max blom Thal is biased, there's
no doubt about that his journalism has been world class
for years. He was great on Russia, coclusion and the

(31:07):
serious stuff, and Iran, the war on Godset, He's been
great and just you can take my word for it
or you can dig into his history to figure it
out for yourself.

Speaker 2 (31:16):
He's the real deal.

Speaker 3 (31:17):
So yes, he's biased, but also he's one of the
better journalists I've come across, so I take him seriously.
So if you take him seriously, if you read that
report and you come to the conclusion that maybe he's
telling the truth here, maybe Donald Trump is afraid for
his life because of specifically bb net and Yahoo and
the nation of Israel, do you still consider them our

(31:39):
top ally?

Speaker 2 (31:40):
I want you to really ask.

Speaker 3 (31:41):
Yourself that, do you not find it incredibly odd that
the leader of the free world, the man with the
greatest military might and economy that has ever existed on
the planet, would be fearful of a nation the size
of New Jersey who doesn't even on record have a
nuclear program.

Speaker 2 (32:00):
Well, I find it odd. I do.

Speaker 3 (32:03):
I also find it odd that so many people in
Trump's orbit and in his cabinet and people he appointed
talked openly about how the Epstein story was one of
the biggest and most important stories. I'm talking about Bongino
and Cashpitel, head of the FBI, Deputy director of the FBI,
just beating the drum for years.

Speaker 2 (32:23):
Don't let the story die. The Epstein story is.

Speaker 3 (32:26):
Kind of the root of the power, the root of
the problem, but it's also the leverage point for blackmail,
and we have to understand it. And then all those
guys get into a position to power, they all look
like they've seen a ghost, and none of them want
to tell you the truth anymore. All of a sudden,
that story there is no there there. Turn your head away,
forget about it, move on. What are you a Thomas

(32:47):
Massey fan?

Speaker 2 (32:48):
Yes, I am. Well wouldn't that be interesting? Wouldn't that
be odd that.

Speaker 3 (32:53):
All these guys that were just like they all were like,
we're gonna get to the answers, vote for us. And
then they get in there and they give you nothing,
and they flip on a dime total one to eight.
And then you have the fact that if this reporting
act is accurate, that Donald Trump is fearful of Israel,
And then you connect the dot between Epstein, Maxwell Ahud Brock,
that whole thing ties to Israeli intelligence. And then you

(33:16):
have the reports that Trump is fearful for his life,
not just like arbitrarily fearful. Also in the Gray Zone report,
they say that there are tracking devices that were put
on first aid vehicles like first responder vehicles for the
President of the United States, implying that perhaps this is

(33:37):
the benign answer to that right. They want to know
before anybody else if there's a medical emergency for the
President of United States, because he's their top ally, that's
the benign answer. The less benign and more maligned or
vicious answer would be that they may intend to make
a move on Donald Trump, and they want to have
tracking mechanisms or perhaps devices in which if they fail,

(33:59):
they can actually do a follow up strike on the
vehicles that would be as go according him towards medical help. Look,
it's possible. Okay, This is not me being braggadocious about
their capacity. I have watched them and I have listened
to them brag for years about their intelligence capacities. They
have been very overt about what they are capable of

(34:20):
and braggadocius in doing so.

Speaker 8 (34:22):
We create a pretend world. We are a global production company.
We write the screenplay where the directors where the producers
were the main actors. The world is our stage.

Speaker 3 (34:35):
So yeah, then you also have the fact that Max
Blumenthal also told dem Dillon that Boris Johnson when he
was the Prime Minister in the UK had baby Ntnahoo
come to town and asked to use his private bathroom,
in which he goes in there, uses it allegedly, and

(34:55):
then Boris Johnson's security team discovers wire tabs in the
shit there. So we're not talking about like head of Mozad,
head of Israeli intelligence that's doing this. We're talking about
the Prime Minister of Israel is actually planning a wire
tap on the Prime Minister of the UK.

Speaker 2 (35:14):
All right. Then you also have reports from John Kiraku, former.

Speaker 3 (35:19):
CIA official, who says this about how Israeli intelligence used
to function with American intelligence.

Speaker 14 (35:25):
I never met anybody at the CIA who was pro Israel, never,
not one, not a single person. They go to the
ambassador's Christmas party. Now they're living in Jerusalem. The embassy
at the time was in Tel Aviv, and so it's
about a thirty or forty minute drive to get from
one city to the other. They come home at the
end of the party and people had taken shits in
all of their toilets in their house. Every toilet had

(35:45):
had shitted.

Speaker 7 (35:46):
You know.

Speaker 6 (35:47):
Not cool.

Speaker 14 (35:48):
They're not doing anything, they're not working against the Israelis.
They're just doing normal stuff. He's studying Arabic. She's just
in the embassy's you know, economic section. And then when
their tour was over, to your tour, the ambassador threw
a going away party for them, which is a normal thing.
And they get back to the house and the dog
is under the dining room table whimpering because somebody had

(36:10):
cut the dog's tail off and they wrapped it with
gauze and with medical tape.

Speaker 2 (36:14):
Now, why would you do something like that.

Speaker 14 (36:16):
What do you hope to gain except to make us
hate you. If you're trying to win friends and influence people,
that's really not the way you're going to want to go.
So now here are these people, who, if anything, were
moderately supportive of the Israelis, who came home only with
bitterness and hatred toward the Israelis for this harassment that
lasted for two years.

Speaker 3 (36:37):
Now, does all of this bean that they're actually responsible
for pulling the trigger or even orchestrating or ordering this
lone gunman loanatic to take out Charlie Kirk. No, it
doesn't mean that. It does not, But it does mean
that there was some pressures being applied, and it does
mean that there are some connections, and there does mean
that there are some motives that make sense that actually

(36:59):
do add up that whether you agree that it's possible
to whether you think that they did it or not,
I hope that we can all be honest with ourselves
enough to acknowledge that, yes, there was motivations. Potentially, yes
there were. So maybe you're thinking to yourself as I
was thinking to myself, because I was trying to like
actually disprove this narrative. In the early days, I was
very much opposed to it, just because I didn't see

(37:22):
any firm evidence. But then as you start to think
more deeply about it, you're like, Okay, now you're got
this report, Now you got this and you're like starting
to connect some dots, and you're like thinking, maybe it
is possible.

Speaker 2 (37:30):
I'm not so sure.

Speaker 3 (37:31):
But as I'm trying to disprove it in my own head,
I'm thinking to myself, Well, if you're going to take
out a political commentator in America who's anti Israel.

Speaker 2 (37:40):
You got a lot of better options.

Speaker 3 (37:42):
Charlie Kirk is about as pro Israel a voice as
you'll find who is somewhat skeptical of Israel, right like
Candice Tucker, a lot of other names. I'm not I
don't want to put anybody you know in jeopardy, so
I'll just leave it at that. But there's a lot
of other people that are much more open only antagonistic
towards Israeli relationships to America than Charlie Kirk was. But

(38:05):
then you consider the fact that he's actually got especially
if you've looked at the response after his tragic loss
of his life, he had arguably a comparable reach into
the young demographic in America more than Tucker Carlson even
And when you look at the statistics as to demographic
groups and their support for Israel, it's tiered, and it

(38:27):
just goes off a cliff. You start up here and
it's the old folks sixty plus and they're still predominantly
in favor of Israel and them being our top ally,
and then it just goes It's like, none of the
young people want to have anything to do with Israel
at this point. So even on the right, it's majority
of young conservatives like self identified don't want to be

(38:48):
involved with supporting Israel, at least financially. So yeah, Charlie
Kirk had big, big reach, despite the fact that he
kind of had a larger than life persona.

Speaker 2 (38:58):
And he was a tall guy. I think he was
like six or four. He was a few inches taller
than me when I met him. He had major reach.

Speaker 3 (39:06):
He was thirty one years old and he had major,
major influence on the college campuses. Now why did he, Well, one,
he's close through their age, so they're gonna take his
opinion more seriously. But also he like the whole way
he built his name was going college campus to college campus,
debating these lunatics and trying to convince them that his
worldview was right, or at least get clickbaitable material that

(39:26):
he could put out there and make it go viral.
And he did, and he grew an enormous platform as
a consequence of it. But point being, basically every kid
in college had seen one of those videos or he
had come to their school. So this guy had major,
major influence on conservatism in America amongst the young.

Speaker 2 (39:44):
So what matters most to Israel?

Speaker 3 (39:47):
As I said, they already have still a decent amount
of support amongst the more elderly in our society. But
they were hemorrhaging support amongst the young. Well, what matters
for the future. It's not the old, it's young. So
if they lost all support amongst the young, that would
be devastating and it would basically doom them to failure,

(40:08):
which I might add, in my opinion, is why they're
moving so aggressively against Iran, Yemen, Gaza, like all of
their neighbors. Basically because I think they realized that the
clock is sticking, that the support is winding down just
on a demographic shift, and that's why they're moving so aggressively.
So what would be the nail in the coffin sorry
pun not intended to their approval ratings amongst the young

(40:31):
conservatives in America? It would be if Charlie Kirk starts
to go America first means America first. It wouldn't be hateful,
it'd be how I approach it. I would imagine it
would be I just look, we're thirty seven trillion dollars
in debt. We've absolutely destroyed ourselves with these endless wars.
I'm also a Christian, I mean he would say this.
I'm also a Christian, and I think that we need

(40:52):
to give piece a chance and I just think that
our relationship with Israel has been to our detriment on
the whole, and therefore no malice, no malice whatsoever. But
I think America first means America first. And he picks
up the Tucker Carlson, Candis Owns, Thomas Massey, Taylor Green Mantle,
and he runs with it. Well, he's thirty one and

(41:14):
he's got millions of college kids that listen to him.
And that's a real problem. And there's your motive. That
is a motivation if they knew. And this is what
Harrison Smith was hypothesizing on my show, was that perhaps
he was being surveilled. And if these reports from the
Graze Owne are accurate, it's almost impossible to believe that

(41:35):
he wasn't being surveilled by Israel. So if he were
being surveilled and he was having communications with say Candias
Owns or Tucker Carlson or whoever else, and he's talking
about like, yeah, I really think that this is a
dead end that I need to pivot. That this is
like like he must have been losing support amongst his base,
and I think he was losing it to Nick Fuentes

(41:57):
Camp as a consequence, of him still being law argely
a water carrier for Israel, regardless of what they were
doing in Guza, and regardless of our economic or social
circumstances domestically, And he's probably thinking to himself like, this
is stupid. And then also I think he's probably thinking
of himself from a moral standpoint, it's disgusting. And maybe
he starts talking about that in private, in confidence, and

(42:18):
they know he's about to flip, and then they go, no.

Speaker 2 (42:22):
You don't, okay.

Speaker 3 (42:24):
I painted a very lengthy picture. That doesn't mean it's true.
It doesn't mean I'm right. But eighty five percent of
that is like documented, provable on video or from other
journalists that are saying it. The fifteen percent is a
conclusion that is a hypothesis. It's a potentiality. I'm just
saying that is a possible reason that someone would want

(42:47):
him taken out. Then you have the oddity of Ben
Shapiro saying this, I.

Speaker 6 (42:52):
Will be coming to college campuses, many of them this year.
Charlie's voice is not silent. We're going to pick up
that bloodstained microphone where Charlie left it.

Speaker 11 (43:04):
Now.

Speaker 3 (43:04):
I watched Candice Owens, and I watched Matt Walsh, and
I've watched a bunch of people's responses as I was
preparing for this episode, because I wanted to really understand
people's demeanor, their mentality. I wanted to know more about
Charlie Kirk, who he was as a person, if he
was as good a guy as I thought he was.
And I have come to the conclusion that yes, in fact,
he was. But I just wanted to see the approach.

Speaker 1 (43:25):
You know.

Speaker 3 (43:26):
I listened to Fuentes even and I thought he gave
basically a call for peace sermon that was absolutely beautiful.

Speaker 15 (43:32):
This is a very delicate situation. I fear that this
is set off a chain reaction. I pray to God
there is no further violence to all of my followers.
If you take up arms, I disavow you. I disown
you in the strongest possible terms. I that is not

(43:53):
what we are about. It would be a profound moral,
politic mistake for anybody to take the bait and to
engage in any kind of reprisal, retaliation, revenge. Remember, we

(44:14):
are the good side, and what makes us good is
that we have Christ. What makes Christianity and Christ so
different from the other religions is that our religion is
based on the bearing of suffering for the sake of
even those that persecute us, and overflowing of love, and

(44:38):
overflowing of self giving love, so much of it it
cannot be contained and unconditioned absolute standard of love for
all of God's children.

Speaker 2 (44:49):
Cannis Owens was more heartfelt.

Speaker 3 (44:51):
She's, you know, recounting all of the good days that
they spent together because they were on the road with
one another for years and years as they were building
up their platforms and their names, and then you get
to and it's just like, look, I'm biased Againstcott. I
don't like Shapiro, so you know, take this with a
grain of salt. But it just rubbed me the wrong way,
Like his approach of we're going to pick up that
bloodstained microphone and carry it from here. I don't know

(45:13):
if you've noticed, but Matt Walsh, Tucker Carlson, Candice owns,
Ian Carroll, all these people, they're they're blowing up like they're.

Speaker 2 (45:19):
Doing better and better.

Speaker 3 (45:21):
Ben Shapiro, in my opinion, as a consequence of him
being right or Die for Israel, his star has started
to fade, and it looks to me like he's trying to,
you know, really take over. And that makes me uncomfortable.
For one thing, because Charlie was such an overt and
adamant and eloquent Christian, So that doesn't make sense that

(45:42):
Shapiro would step into that gap. That just doesn't seem
to vibe with the entire like ethos of TPUSA, the
broader organization, or its supporters. It just doesn't seem like
a fit. But it also just felt like opportunism. It
felt like, I see, like my star is fading and
and here's my chance. I have a window to you know,

(46:03):
reclaim my mantle as being one of the top conservative
voices in America.

Speaker 2 (46:09):
And it just fucking bothered me.

Speaker 8 (46:10):
Man.

Speaker 3 (46:10):
And I don't know if it was just the fact
that he said bloodstained or it just that I don't
like him, But I'm just telling you, like it comes across,
you know, the approach that he's intending is being courageous
that even though you took out Charlie Kirk, I'm gonna
be on college campuses and I'm not canceling my tour.
And look, maybe that's all it is. And if so cool,

(46:33):
I'm like, take this with a grain salt. This is
my opinion, but it didn't feel like that to me.
It felt like I have an opportunity to capitalize on this,
and just opportunism, that's how it comes across.

Speaker 2 (46:42):
So then you have kenn Of Owen's saying this.

Speaker 9 (46:46):
And it's hard for me to watch the people who
were pressuring him, I don't know, just say the things
that they're saying, you know, I just there's something about
it that just feels really fake. Feels really fake to me,
and they would have allowed him to lose and wanted
him to lose everything for changing or even slightly modifying

(47:08):
an opinion. And then to see them doing what they're
doing today's hurtful to me. It's very heartful to me.

Speaker 3 (47:13):
And then you have Mike Sernovich that's responding to her
and he's saying this, and he's like, eh, I think
that there's a lot of people who were, like they know,
were applying pressure to Charlie Kirk to get back on
script when it comes to Israel, and they're now using
his untimely death as an opportunity to kind of fill

(47:35):
that void with a pro Israeli narrative.

Speaker 2 (47:37):
Well, that rubs me the wrong way? Does it rub?
You the wrong way.

Speaker 3 (47:40):
It probably should. It seems very very gross, especially from
people who you would imagine would be, if not friends,
at least close associates. Just doesn't look good. Doesn't look
good at all. And then you have Mike Cernovich just
yesterday posting that he has crafted a dead man's switch
and if anything happens to him, it has a whole
list of names that will be put out into the

(48:02):
wild to basically figure out who took his life. And
I'm like, what the fuck is happening now? Cernovich is
not Ian Carol, He's not even Clint Rustley. He doesn't
much toy or go down the conspiracy theorist path. So
the fact that he is kind of coming out of
nowhere and aligning himself with Candas Owens on this makes
me feel like Candas Owns is telling the truth personally,

(48:24):
that like there was immense pressure on Charlie Kirk to
get back on script when it comes to Israel, And
if Cannis is telling the truth, she's saying that he
was having a major kind of religious shift on this,
that he was thinking deeply about it. And my point is,
if he was thinking deeply about it, and if Candice
Owens knew that. That means that he's communicating with candas owns.

(48:47):
And if you think Cannis Owens isn't wire taped, you're
out her fucking mind. She is absolutely being wired tapped.
So they have reason to know that he's shifting. If
she's right, they have capacity to get to the guy, obviously,
because they've assassinated countless people over the past couple of
years and they have motive. Does that mean they didn't know?
It absolutely doesn't. But I just I want us to all, like,

(49:09):
really be thinking critically and openly about this.

Speaker 2 (49:12):
Okay.

Speaker 3 (49:13):
I just I know I'm gonna get hate for even
putting these ideas out there, but I feel like I'd
be lying if I didn't just tell the truth about
what I'm seeing and what I think is possible.

Speaker 2 (49:24):
And that's all I'm doing.

Speaker 3 (49:25):
I'm trying to be as fucking crystal clear about this
because I could probably make a lot higher viewership and
get way more subscribers and likes and listens and everything
else if I were to just come out and make
adamant claims about any of this stuff. I am not
interested in doing that because I very much do not
want to pin the blame on someone who's not responsible
for this. But I fucking absolutely will not allow the

(49:45):
blame to be applied to someone if they didn't do
it either. You know what I'm saying, like if this
kid didn't act alone. Because you got to understand, once
you've been in this world as long as I have,
I've studied all of these like FBI operations against you know,
radical conservatives, you know Whitmer operation right, and all you

(50:06):
find time and time again is that it's FBI agents
and FBI informants flipping against good people who were not
actually intended to do anything wrong. With the vast majority
of the time, not always, obviously, but the vast majority
of the time, it seems as if they are just
taking like either innocent people or low IQ people and
they are just straight up and trapping them. And then
you have this rash of trans people that are going

(50:30):
on uncommitted with these killings, and it's.

Speaker 2 (50:32):
Just like, it's very convenient. I'm just saying, very convenient. Now.

Speaker 3 (50:38):
I think that there are lots of people in the
trans community that have been radicalized, and they very much
view Charlie Kirk as evidence by their response to his
untimely death, his murder that have demonstrated that that hate
is very real. So I'm not saying it's impossible. As
I opened with, It's definitely fucking possible, but that doesn't
mean that's what happened. Okay, So if this kid did it,

(51:01):
the reason I'm bringing all this up is to say,
if this kid did it, you still have to keep
open the possibility that he was being used. The initial
reports from the FBI is that he's being radicalized through
these groups on Discord or wherever else this is. I'm
too old for this shit, so the younger audience may
be able to tune me in, But I have heard
that there is some really radical shit. You know, Chance

(51:24):
kind of like fading, but Discord is kind of where
it's at now. But there's like really radical political movements
that exist, like niche things that kind of radicalize one another.
And there you know, there's oftentimes FBI agents or informants
that are in these groups that are radicalizing these people
to their own ends, for their own purposes, either for

(51:44):
operations against you know, political dissidents that they don't like,
or just to pad their stats. Look, I've had Kyle Surafin,
I've had Steve Freen on the show. These are both
the FBI whistlers. They've confirmed this, like that's how this
shit actually works, that they they basically set up people
who probably would have never hurt a soul because they
want to pad their numbers to keep their budgets up.
And they do this fucking every year, year in and

(52:06):
year out, and they target different groups depending on who
the president is and what their marching orders are. So
like under a Republican president, oftentimes the FBI will be
targeting the Muslim community, and under a Democrat president, they'll
be targeting the Christian conservative movement and they'll be trying
to get them caught up in charges so they can
label them terrorists. And this is why the Biden administration
was saying that the greatest threat to America was, you know,

(52:27):
religious white extremists, Christian extremists in America. It's like, fucking no,
it's not. It's obviously nonsense, but that's according to the
Biden FBI. That's what they were saying for years, and
they were coming out with reports they're talking about potential
domestic violent extremists, and they were including in that fucking
libertarians and people who have you know, Betsy Ross Flaggs
and like basically anybody who believes in the Constitution is
the potential domestic terroriss Okay, So what I'm saying is

(52:51):
these are not agencies to be trusted. They don't function
in an honorable fashion, and they often work to try
and set people up.

Speaker 2 (52:58):
Did they do that with this?

Speaker 3 (53:00):
You have to ask yourself that, and it's an uncomfortable question,
and it definitely gets into tenfoil hat zone and it
definitely gets into the very hard to prove zone because
if it's an intentional radicalization and you try and basically
spin up a guy to take out someone that you want,
that's hard to do like that. Takes months, sometimes years

(53:21):
to radicalize someone to do stuff like that. And I
know it sounds crazy, but the truth is they've done
it before. They absolutely have, from MK Ultra to all
these other things. It's not impossible. So I'm not saying
that's what happened. I'm just saying it's a possibility that
we have to keep on the table of options to keep,
you know, seeking the truth here, all right.

Speaker 2 (53:42):
I sprinted through that.

Speaker 3 (53:44):
I gave you everything I possibly could as fast as
I could as you can tell I'm trying to be
crystal clear.

Speaker 2 (53:50):
I don't know for sure.

Speaker 3 (53:51):
I don't and I think anybody telling you that they
know for sure is probably lying, except for maybe people
in Charlie's inner circle, who would probably have better sources
and understand this stuff in a more in depth fashion
than I'm capable of obviously, So I just.

Speaker 2 (54:07):
Want to end with this.

Speaker 3 (54:08):
Regardless of whether or not you think that this hypothesis
is even possible and say it's not, just consider for
a second that the president of the United States is afraid,
specifically of the leader of another country.

Speaker 2 (54:21):
And is that a paradigm you're willing to accept.

Speaker 3 (54:24):
If America is the greatest country on earth, if it's
the greatest power on earth, why would our leader be
afraid of anybody, much less a foreign leader, And why
would we be giving that country money to the tune
of four billion annually and a much more over the
past couple of years when it comes to military assistance.

(54:45):
Ask yourself that, and then consider why the Epstein stuff
was buried. And then if you want to connect those dots,
feel free, And if you don't want to feel free,
I'm going to connect them because I think that there's
something there. As you know, Damnageno and Cashtel like there's
no there. I think there's a fucking there there, Dan,
I think there's a fucking there, and I think you're

(55:05):
lying about it. I, for one, in honor of Charlie Kirk,
and in honor of all of the people in this world,
this industry, this weird niche thing that I do, I'm
going to continue to seek the truth because it's vitally important.
Because I cannot trust you sons of bitches, to do
the right thing. So everybody else in my world who's

(55:26):
afraid right now, trust me. The fear is rampant, it
is very concerning. The only pathway forward is to continue
to pursue the truth. That's the only pathway.

Speaker 2 (55:35):
That's it.

Speaker 3 (55:36):
And if there's one thing I did love about Charlie
Kirk is that I think that's what he was really
interested in, and in the greatest of ironies, that may
have been why he was ultimately killed. That the one
part of his narrative that he told year in and
year out that he came to the conclusion may have
not been true. He was about to start really telling
the truth about And if that's the reason his life

(55:59):
was taken. Well, then he's even more heroic than I
had initially thought. All right, what a rant. If you
guys enjoyed this, please do with the like button, subscribe,
shirt around and subscribe on Audio Liberty Lockdowns.

Speaker 2 (56:11):
The name of it.

Speaker 3 (56:11):
I'm Clint Russell. Thank you for tuning in. We'll see you.
So today's episode is brought to you by our friends
over it my Pillow. Go to mike Pillow dot com.
Use promo code lockdown, catch yourself some cozy. They don't
even pay me. This is on commission based, so yeah,
I don't get paid for reading this, so I don't
have to say anything I don't want. I just get
to like say it really quickly. My pillow dot com
promo code lockdown. If you buy something, I get a
little spiff. If you don't buy anything, I get nothing.

(56:33):
If you want to support the show, it's an easy
way to do so. They got really good shit, really
cozy stuff. My pillow dot com quote lockdown