October 11, 2025 • 30 mins
Did a friend of Charlie Kirk have foreknowledge of his public execution? We analyze another extraordinary accusation by Candace Owens - and what we think is at the core of her "investigation" into the death of the founder of Turning Point USA.
Support the show: https://redpilledamerica.com/support/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
This is Red Pilled America. Hey, it's Patrick Carrelchi.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
And I'm Adriana Portez and welcome to Red Pilled America's bamboogie.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
I hope you guys are enjoying your week. I know
we are because our Dodger has moved on to the
National League Championship.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
Woo.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
However, our predictions were wrong because the Stankies got spankied
and they're out.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
You know what, I'm completely fine with the stankies winning
and me being wrong on that prediction because they are
the stankies.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
They are the stankies and they really stay.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Join the fambam. Go to Redpilled America dot com click
join in the top menu. We need your guys support.
And if you haven't heard, we are doing video versions
of our show over at YouTube and also Rumble. Just
go in their search bar there and click Red Pilled
America or you know, I'll put it in the show
notes as well too. Yeah. Like I said, hope you
guys are enjoying your week. Things are going really well
(01:17):
over here. Adriana. How's your week going?
Speaker 2 (01:20):
My week's going very good because, like you said, the
Dodgers one. We also, you guys, we released a new
video on YouTube, and I.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
Know what you're thinking.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
You like to listen to the show, but we need
your support on YouTube, and it's so simple. All you
have to do is go to YouTube, search Red Pilled
America in the search bar, give us a follow there,
and please start sharing the videos. We also created little
shorts that you can share on social media with your
friends and family. This is really going to help us
get the word out there and start to change the culture.
(01:52):
So yeah, I'm doing good. A lot of work, though
a lot a lot of work. I'm super overwhelmed with
Red Pilled America, my fashion stuff, my mom's stuff, our
daughters in her senior year. So all of you parents
out there know this is a very busy time. But
you know, overall, I'm happy. I'm grateful. I had a
birthday last week.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
I'm not going to.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Be any older though I decided I'm going to stay
the same age. But you know what, I felt really
grateful this year, really really grateful. I feel like I
have a very very full life. Everybody that I love
reached out to me, and all the people that I'm
not that interested in having in my life anymore didn't.
And I'm totally okay with that.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
You know, getting older is a gift, and I think
we don't celebrate that enough in our culture. I think
we celebrate youth, and we celebrate you know, kind of naivity.
But this wisdom that comes with age, I think is
something that we need to start getting to because I
love the age that I'm at right now. I've said
this a bunch of times here on the on the
(02:54):
show years ago, we worked for who ended up being
the CEO of Ford, Yeah Farley, And back in the
day when he was over at Toyota, we worked with
him and one of the things he said to me
is that his father said that you really don't amount
to anything as a man until you become fifty. And
I didn't agree with him at the time. I think
(03:16):
I was probably thirty four when I heard that. I
now agree with that. I think you age well and
if you can stick around like we haven't, we're here
still and I'm happy with yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
And I mean, listen, the alternative is death, and that's
not good exactly. Now, you got to be grateful for,
you know, all of the wrinkles, all of the sag
you know, it's it's wisdom that you can see now
you're carrying your wisdom and people can see it.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Those lines tell stories.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
We tell stories, and you know you earn them. There's stripes.
You gotta be happy with them and then get the
facelift later.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
So you guys that are wondering what our next audio
documentary is going to be, We're working on a Scott
Adams story, which I think is going to be a
lot of fun, and so that should be coming out
next week, so keep an eye out for that. If
today we're going to be talking about some stuff. I
gotta be honest. I started doing some research for this episode,
(04:14):
you know, to kind of look what's happening in culture
and kind of see what everybody's talking about. And again
everybody is talking about Candice. And when I was done
with this research, I think, you know, you came in,
you said what's wrong? And I just feel like I
just felt gross. I felt gross doing this show.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Yeah, I mean we were kind of bummed because we
didn't want to talk about this again. But there are
so many new developments and I just think that it's
it's something that needs to be talked about.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
Unfortunately, unfortunately it does. And I think I've figured her out.
I think I know what she is, and we're going
to get into that in this episode. We're going to
talk a lot about that. We're going to talk a
little bit about the Gaza piece deal that's coming on,
and also is the economy, how's the economy doing. I
want to get into that just a little bit, maybe
towards the end of the show, because there's some signs
(05:05):
out there that things are, i don't know, maybe a
little bit shakier than we're hearing in the mainstream media.
But first I want to start off with this more
of these conspiracy theories that I want to get into
and debunk, and also just kind of point out some
of the tactics that are being used right now in
these Charlie Kirk conspiracy theory investigations into his death. So
(05:28):
this is Candace. She basically now has a new source
where she says with one hundred percent certainty that the
shot to Charlie Kirk to the neck was shot from
the front, and that there was no exit wound, and
that the fragments of the bullet ended up staying within
(05:49):
the neck. It did not exit, and it lodged into
his neck. But she makes this pretty audacious claim to
keep kind of some of this conspiracy theory alive. So
I want to play a little quick segment from her
on this topic. Here's Candace.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
As we continue this investigation, we are definitively getting closer.
So what do we recall? Well, we were told that
Charlie just had healthy bones, that it was a miracle
that the gun did not take his neck out, and
that his spine somehow stopped it. I can now officially
debunk that Marvel storyline, and therefore we focused our investigation
(06:31):
on what actually happened on nine to ten. Because I
have new information and I'm presenting it to the public today,
I first and foremost have to tell you right at
the top, I can't tell you exactly who the information
came from or which parties were involved in giving me
this information, because I don't want to get anybody in trouble.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
I think that's kind of an interesting take. First of all,
I want to pause it here for a second. She
is criticizing the FBI and the government officials police force
for not giving up all of the information. This is
one of her kind of go tos that, oh that's
kind of weird. Hmmm. Why isn't that an information given up?
(07:04):
That's strange. So she is now though, saying that she
is not going to give up that information. She just
want to divulge her sources. Couldn't you possibly think that
that's potentially what law enforcement is doing. I mean, they
do have a major investigation going on.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Yes, but you can see what she's doing here. I mean,
there is so much distrust with the FBI and the
MAGA movement, which is warranted, by the way, and so
she's feeding.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
Off of that. Okay, but Trump's people are in there now,
So what she's basically the position that she's kind.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Of all Trump's people.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
No, but that right at the top they are you
got Dan Bongino and you got Cash Pattel. Right there
at the top, you have TPUSA working with law enforcement
to try to work this investigation through and get a
conviction with this guy. So anyways, she goes on from there.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
But I can say that I have positively verified something
about the injury that Charlie sustained to his neck that
I think is going to go a very long way
in terms of helping those of us who have been sleuthing,
those of us who want answers those of us who
are dedicating our time to this because what we are
being told by the authorities beggars belief. As John Arena
Mappin said, it's just simply beggar's belief. This is about
(08:21):
the injury. Okay, So Andrew Covett was I can tell
you telling the truth in part when he wrote that
very long tweet in which he tried to explain why
there was no exit wound.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
Andrew Covid is TPUSA representative.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Do you recall this long story short? He said, I'm
going to read it. I want to address some of
the things that the lack of an exit wound. About
the lack of an exit wound with Charlie, I'm usually
not interested in delving into most of this kind of
online chatter, and I apologize that this is somewhat graphic,
but in this case, the fact that there wasn't an
exit wound is probably another miracle, and I want people
(08:58):
to know. I just spoke with the surgeon who worked
on Charlie in the hospital. He said, the well, it
absolutely should have gone through, which is very normal for
a high powered, high velocity round. I've seen wounds from
this caliber many times, and they always just go through everything.
This would have taken a moose or two down in elk, etc.
But it didn't go through. Charlie's body stopped it. I
mentioned to his doctor that there were dozens of staff,
(09:20):
students and special guests standing directly behind Charlie on the
other side of the tent, and he replied it was
an absolute miracle that someone else didn't get killed. His
bone was so healthy and the density was so so
impressive that he's like the man of Steel. It should
have just gone through and through. It likely would have
killed those standing behind him too. In the end, the
(09:42):
coroner did find the bullet just beneath the skin. Even
in death, Charlie managed to save the lies of those
around him. Remarkable.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
So to kind of address this, because I think this
is kind of something we need to talk about. Is
the tone of that tweet that she is reading from
right there, from this representative of TPUSA and the surgeon
that she that he spoke to, this feels to me
kind of like a morale booster kind of a response.
(10:10):
This isn't a death certificate, This isn't something that's like official,
This isn't something that is going into the official autopsy.
This is a guy speaking about a man that everybody
loved and that somehow his body protected others from getting
killed from this shot. It wasn't something that I think
(10:31):
you can take everything that is in that statement verbatim
as evidence, let's say, in a court case.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Yeah, And he shared this shortly after Charlie's death, when
everybody was really really still in shock and in the
thick of the morning. And I feel like he did
was trying to make people in his way feel better.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
Exactly.
Speaker 3 (10:53):
Let's go on, keep that up for just a second,
because it's really around here. His bone was so healthy
and the density was so so impressive that he's like
the man of steel that we just went and something's
not right, something not right.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
Okay, So there's that kind of whole conspiracy tone again.
All right, This is not an official document. This is
not a death certificate or an autopsy. This is somebody
speaking about a man that had just died. Their families
reading all of these things. The loved ones is reading
all of these things, and she is taking every word
of it and breaking it down. And she's not a
(11:28):
dumb person. She should be able to discern that as
somebody that is taking on this role as a quote
unquote investigative journalist. Now this is just it's just.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
I find the whole thing so weird. This was her
friend and she just she can't stop talking about it now.
It just feels like she's just using it for content.
It just it just does not sit well with me
at all. I don't like it leaves a bad taste
in my mouth.
Speaker 1 (11:53):
What's going a lot of stuff It's not right.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
I just don't know why a surgeon would be saying
something that actually only the medical examiner, somebody that specialized
in forensics could really contry. Guess a surgeon can tell you,
or actually any personal common sense can tell you that
your bone density is better when you're younger. But this
seemed a little bit too performative. Now I can tell
you Pity is telling truth about is that Charlie's neck
(12:19):
indeed did stop the bullet without question, Okay, And this
is going to dispel a lot of theories that are
out there. And I'm telling you this one hundred percent.
Charlie Kirk was shot from the front and the bullet
did not exit, and at least a fragment of the
bullet was recovered from his neck, and I'm going to
(12:42):
tell you exactly where it was recovered from. I have
fact checked this information from multiple sources. Now, if actually
missing on this for a little bit over a week,
right around here, so think about almost in line with
your shoulder blade, right in the center. Now, why is
that helpful because it gives us a bullet rejector Okay.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
No it doesn't. It does not give you a bullet trajectory.
I know a little bit about physics because of a
master's and applied physics, and knowing where it landed does
not give you a bullet trajectory. You don't know if
he was turned a little bit here, turned a little
bit there. You don't know if it bounced off something.
Once the bullet entered it hits the skin, it hits
(13:24):
a collar bone, it hits a spine, it starts to
bounce around in there, it breaks up if it's certain
kind of ammunition, because there's different kinds of ammunition. Once
it hits an object, it is impossible to know with
certainty the trajectory of something because, especially when she's talking
about it in the way that she's talking about it,
(13:46):
finding the bullet in the location that you found it
in it could have bounced around in there and hit
off other things. So she's wrong on that.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
And it was stopped and a fragment was pulled from
I think right, if you're just touching your spine in
line with your shoulder blade, that leads us obviously to
the part that he's maybe not being forthcoming about. They
did not recover a bullet from a thirty HODD six.
They didn't recover a bullet from a thirty odd six.
(14:14):
Just didn't happen. Okay. If it found a thirty odd
six bullet, Charlie's death certificate certainly would have reflected that.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
No, that wouldn't I'll get to that in a second.
Speaker 3 (14:23):
In suicide situations, that's just one example. Medical examiners feel
free to chime in. I've spoken to quite a few,
But when the gun and the bullet are known, they
are reflected onto the death certificate. Okay, there is not
one reflected onto Charlie Kirk's death certificate.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
It wasn't a suicide, by the way, So that's a
bad example. A suicide would mean that the gun and
the casing and everything was right there with the body. Okay,
But she's off on that, and I'll get to that
in a second.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Because they did not recover a bullet from a thirty
odd six hunters and military men rejoice. It turns out
that common sense still rules the roost. Okay, you guys
were right. You're absolutely right. And this is why I
hate politics, because it requires us to submit to the
idea and we were all somehow born yesterday.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
Okay, So let's get to this for a second. The
death certificate. When you have somebody that's going for the
cause of death and in putting the cause of death
onto a death certificate, these people are not ballistic experts.
If they were to guess at the caliber of the
bullet and put that in a death certificate, they jeopardize
(15:34):
a case if they were to get that wrong. All right,
What they do is they describe what is the cause
of death. They describe the wound, and they describe the
fragment that they find. They are not going to describe
the caliber of the bullet that is launched into a body,
because in this case it's fragment. They're not going to
(15:55):
be able to tell the caliber from that. Okay. And
if you go to the CDC's recommendations on how to
fill out a death certificate for a gun wound that
somebody died from a gun wound. It is pretty informative,
and they have one here in the describe how injury
(16:15):
occurred shot by another person using a handgun. Okay, there's
no caliber listed in this example. This is not something
that a medical person is trained to do. You're talking
about building a case to be able to take somebody
to court and put them away for life and potentially
(16:37):
give them the death penalty. You're not going to rely
on a medical examiner.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
To give you ballistics information.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
Exactly, not going to happen, exactly. Let's go on that.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
It really can just life really can just be a
Marvel comic with people that are I guess DC comic
where there are men of steel that are able because
they're young to stop three thousand pounds of energy that
is coming at them. That didn't happen. So where does
that leave us, guys? Well, the part that is now
(17:08):
extraordinarily suspicious is that Andrews claiming that he had a
conversation with the surgeon who offered up the idea that
it really was just your modern Christian miracle, that Charlie
was just young and his bones had a lot of density,
which made him stronger somehow than a cape buffalo. Enough
push ups and asparagus, and you too can stop three
(17:30):
thousand pounds of energy coming at you. What are we
to make of that? What are we to make of
the fact that Charlie did not do that? Actually, it
means that he was shot with a completely different kind
of gun, obviously, okay, the kind where this would make
sense that it didn't cut through him, the kind where
(17:51):
it would make sense that outside of an artery effectively
exploding from the front, there was you know, his neck
didn't explode, which that particular weapon that they were trying
to tell us Charlie was killed with would have gone
through about seven x.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
So she is basing her entire theory on the fact
that it did not say in the death certificate that
a thirty to six bullet was recovered. She's claiming that
it would clearly have been in the death certificate if
it was recovered. There I could pull up death certificates
where somebody was shot with a gun wound and or
(18:33):
with a bullet wound, and that do not have the
caliber of the bullet within the death certificate. Okay, so
now she is setting this up that there was another gun,
a different gun, and she is about to make a
incredible claim. And we're going to get to that right
after the break. Licorice, Licorice, Where art thou licorice? If
(18:56):
you listen to Red Pilled America, you know that I
love licorice. And there is no licorice in America better
than the delicious gourmet licorice made by the Licorice Guy.
The Licorice Guy is simply the best. What sets their
licorice apart is its flavor and freshness. They have a
great selection of flavors to choose from, like red blue, raspberry, black,
(19:17):
and green apple, just to name a few. The freshness
of the Licorice Guy is unlike anything you've ever tasted
in licorice before. Seriously, if you haven't tried licorice from
the Licorice Guy yet, then you ain't living life right.
Trust me, you will not regret it. It's time to
dump that store bought liquorice but so hard it'll break
your teeth, and get yourself the soft, fresh stuff from
(19:38):
the licorice Guy. What I also love about the Liquorice
Guy is that it's an American family owned business. It's
made right here in the beautiful US of A. We
are big proponents of buying American and supporting American workers.
Right now, Red Pilled America listeners get fifteen percent off
when they enter RPA fifteen at checkout. Visit licoriceguy dot
(19:59):
com and enter RPA fifteen at checkout. That's Licorice dot com.
A ship daily. Treat yourself and those you love and
taste the difference. You're listening to Red Pilled America's vamboogie.
Join the Fanbam. Go to Red Pilled America dot com
(20:20):
and click join in the top menu. Support storytelling that
aligns with your values, and make sure to check out
our new videos over at YouTube and Rumble. Just go
in the search bar and type in Red Pilled America
Podcast and you will find them, or check our show notes.
So when we left you, Candice was coming up with
this theory that there was a second gun, or there's
(20:43):
another gun that was actually the gun that killed Charlie Kirk,
and her theory is based on the fact that in
her according to her source, maybe she got a hand
handle on the on the death certificate, but the desk
certificate does not include the caliber of the bullet. I
(21:03):
can go online right now and find bullet wound deaths
that do not include the caliber of the bullet. Those
people are not ballistics experts. They are not qualified to
give that kind of an assessment, especially if it is
a fragment of a bullet. Her claim is is it
it was not that type of bullet, because that kind
(21:25):
of a bullet would have blown out his neck and
would have gone through seven necks. By the way, MLK
Junior was shot with a thirty odd six and killed,
and the bullet was lodged, there was no exit wound.
That is information that's out there on the archive, the
National Archive. You can go check that out. It happens.
(21:47):
It depends on the caliber, excuse me, the kind of
bullet you're using, the kind of ammunition you're using. But
she's going to go on right now and come up
with a new theory.
Speaker 3 (21:57):
You will recall that throughout all of this or during
this mayhem. Rather, there were people who were insisting, by
the way they're on the ground, the witnesses that were
insisting that they heard multiple shots.
Speaker 1 (22:09):
All you need to do is grab multiple videos. There
are so many different videos of different angles on this
and all you hear is one shot. She's going on hearsay.
She plays a clip of somebody that you can kind
of hear in the background saying I heard two shots.
She's going on somebody that said something like that. Do
(22:30):
it yourself. Listen to the video yourself. You will hear
one gun shot here. It is not counting gang violence. Great,
it's one shot. That is one shot here. She goes
on with her theory.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
Now, for those of you that are still caught up
in what I just told you, which is that, for
a fact, Charlie was shot from the front, so we
know the bullet directory. There's no game here. There's no
magic bullitz. It's a smaller weapon.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
By the way, I believe he was shot from the
front as well, and that it was a single shot,
and that it got lodged to his neck. That we
would know if there was an exit one. But she's
saying this, we know this for a fact. She might
know this for a fact because she's claim to see
the death certificate, But we don't know this for a
fact because we aren't seeing the death certificate.
Speaker 3 (23:19):
Okay, your ears didn't betray you. My ears didn't betray me.
We definitely did hear a very recognizable sound of a
rifle shot. But I'm telling you that Charlie wasn't hit
with that rifle. And there is not a medical examiner's
report or a death certificate which will stipulate otherwise it
doesn't exist. So what exactly are the FEDS building their
(23:42):
case on vibes or sheer corruption? Because I'm thinking it
might be the latter, and who would be the person
that can make that fit? Look, I did receive a tip,
and guess what, there was another person in this never ending,
brand new cast of characters that was also involved in
this story. In this person in an email insisted to
(24:05):
me that this is somebody that we should look further into.
That's the medical examiner. It is a woman named doctor
Dedra Weiss Amaro is her name, and she blew in
from California. She was announced as the new state medical
examiner in May of twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
Okay, I mean, so we have so many different corrupt
people in this now. We have TPUSA is corrupt, we
have the FBI is corrupt. We have a medical examiner
now that is corrupt. We have all the higher executives
over at TPUSA is corrupt. There's a lot of people
in on this. She's going to talk later about an
engineering company is corrupt, but she goes on with this theory,
(24:44):
and this is what I really want to get to.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
It is likely that a rifle was fired to muffle
the sound of a smaller gun, which maybe actually kind
of had to if we're considering the trajectory that I'm
telling you here to here kind of had to come
from the front of Charlie. And I will say that
is now my well informed opinion, well informed opinion, that
(25:10):
we are looking for a person that was a lot
closer to Charlie and likely in the audience. And that
goes a long way, by the way, in terms of
trying to explain why they're maybe hiding the footage from
behind Charlie's head. Maybe that is the reason that that
footage was so crucial first and foremost, and tons of
(25:31):
other cameras that one gets grabbed first. It seems to
me that there's a lot of hiding, and there's definitively
a lot of lying that's going on. I told you
Tyler Boyer lied. He just lied. The person who took
the cameras down was absolutely not instructed to do so
by law enforcement. He just wasn't. Okay, So why say that? Also,
(25:51):
why grab the one behind his head first of all
the cameras? Why that one first and foremost?
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Okay? So now she's implicating Tyler Boyer as in on this.
And when I heard this, I'm thinking, has this woman
ever shot a gun in her life? Because what she
is claiming happened is there is somebody else in the
crowd that pulled out a handgun of a smaller caliber.
(26:18):
This man or woman pulled out a gun in front
of everybody, aimed it at Charlie and shot him right
in the neck. If you have ever shot a gun,
you would know that. You would hear like, how did
they sink those two gun shots? She's claiming that there
(26:40):
was another gun shot from another spot that was used
to muffle a smaller caliber gun.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
There was a lot of practice. They practiced many many times.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
So they sinked it. Yeah, they sinked it perfect They
sinked it perfectly. Let's claim let's claim that it's like
you know, Mark Wahlberg's movie The Shooter where it was
like electronics sink. Okay, let's claim that it was that.
Why not just use the smaller caliber for the other
For the other gun, you could use a twenty two
or twenty two shot from a certain distance also has
(27:13):
good aim as well too, if you're shooting for the
neck and you're shooting for the jugular and you have
that kind of But she is claiming this man stood
up in this crowd with a gun. All you have
to do is look at the videos of the crowd.
You would see like almost like a doctor hits your knee,
check your reflexes. You would see the heads all moved
(27:34):
to that area to where this potential second other shooter
is or where another shooter is. You have no evidence
that there is another shooter. And the only evidence that
she's basing all of this on, according to the way
that she's pitching this is the fact that there is,
in her eyes, the fact that there is no thirty
to six within the death certificate. This is beyond shoddy journalism.
(28:00):
This is trying to take the infra that you have
in front of you to weave together a conspiracy theory.
It's shocking to me that she thinks that she can
get away with this to her audience but here's the thing.
She's gotten away with so many other mistakes. She knows
that her audience isn't going to call her out, or
she's not going to be called out on this stuff.
(28:22):
This is the tool of the conspiracy theorist is to
bring up questions, constantly bring up questions and don't provide
answers to those questions. That is the tool of the
conspiracy theorist.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
It's funny because I didn't ever really stop to think
about what a conspiracy theorist she really is. What I
see is going on here with Candace is that she's
clearly a woman who has been rattled by this assassination.
And I think that this is bringing up a ton
of fear for her personally, and she is And I
(29:00):
feel like I'm being great here in saying this about her,
and that this is why she's gone down this path.
I feel like that fear has crippled her personally and
has completely clouded her judgment.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
You might be correct on that there might be some
trauma associated with her reaction to this.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
I promise you she's afraid. She has four small children.
What is she going to do? How is she going
to send those kids to school.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Well, she opened up. She's one of the segments recently
with you know, being late because she had homeschooling starting.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
So yeah, I mean she's scared.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
She's scared.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
Shere's the problem with all of that is that she
is implicating other people in this man approach to investigation.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
And I'm in no way saying that what she's doing
is right.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
I mean, she's basically claiming Tyler Boyer is now complicit.
She is now implicating another person, and she is claiming
that that other person had fore knowledge of Charlie Kirk
being at executed, publicly executed. And this is such an
egregious air that she is making that we can easily
(30:12):
debunk and we're going to do that in Part two.
Go over to Part two right now and join us
over there as we continue this analysis of these horrendous
conspiracy theories that are out there on the death of
Charlie Kirk.
This is Red Pilled America. Hey, it's Patrick Carrelchi.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
And I'm Adriana Portez and welcome to Red Pilled America's bamboogie.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
I hope you guys are enjoying your week. I know
we are because our Dodger has moved on to the
National League Championship.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
Woo.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
However, our predictions were wrong because the Stankies got spankied
and they're out.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
You know what, I'm completely fine with the stankies winning
and me being wrong on that prediction because they are
the stankies.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
They are the stankies and they really stay.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Join the fambam. Go to Redpilled America dot com click
join in the top menu. We need your guys support.
And if you haven't heard, we are doing video versions
of our show over at YouTube and also Rumble. Just
go in their search bar there and click Red Pilled
America or you know, I'll put it in the show
notes as well too. Yeah. Like I said, hope you
guys are enjoying your week. Things are going really well
(01:17):
over here. Adriana. How's your week going?
Speaker 2 (01:20):
My week's going very good because, like you said, the
Dodgers one. We also, you guys, we released a new
video on YouTube, and I.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
Know what you're thinking.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
You like to listen to the show, but we need
your support on YouTube, and it's so simple. All you
have to do is go to YouTube, search Red Pilled
America in the search bar, give us a follow there,
and please start sharing the videos. We also created little
shorts that you can share on social media with your
friends and family. This is really going to help us
get the word out there and start to change the culture.
(01:52):
So yeah, I'm doing good. A lot of work, though
a lot a lot of work. I'm super overwhelmed with
Red Pilled America, my fashion stuff, my mom's stuff, our
daughters in her senior year. So all of you parents
out there know this is a very busy time. But
you know, overall, I'm happy. I'm grateful. I had a
birthday last week.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
I'm not going to.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Be any older though I decided I'm going to stay
the same age. But you know what, I felt really
grateful this year, really really grateful. I feel like I
have a very very full life. Everybody that I love
reached out to me, and all the people that I'm
not that interested in having in my life anymore didn't.
And I'm totally okay with that.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
You know, getting older is a gift, and I think
we don't celebrate that enough in our culture. I think
we celebrate youth, and we celebrate you know, kind of naivity.
But this wisdom that comes with age, I think is
something that we need to start getting to because I
love the age that I'm at right now. I've said
this a bunch of times here on the on the
(02:54):
show years ago, we worked for who ended up being
the CEO of Ford, Yeah Farley, And back in the
day when he was over at Toyota, we worked with
him and one of the things he said to me
is that his father said that you really don't amount
to anything as a man until you become fifty. And
I didn't agree with him at the time. I think
(03:16):
I was probably thirty four when I heard that. I
now agree with that. I think you age well and
if you can stick around like we haven't, we're here
still and I'm happy with yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:29):
And I mean, listen, the alternative is death, and that's
not good exactly. Now, you got to be grateful for,
you know, all of the wrinkles, all of the sag
you know, it's it's wisdom that you can see now
you're carrying your wisdom and people can see it.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Those lines tell stories.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
We tell stories, and you know you earn them. There's stripes.
You gotta be happy with them and then get the
facelift later.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
So you guys that are wondering what our next audio
documentary is going to be, We're working on a Scott
Adams story, which I think is going to be a
lot of fun, and so that should be coming out
next week, so keep an eye out for that. If
today we're going to be talking about some stuff. I
gotta be honest. I started doing some research for this episode,
(04:14):
you know, to kind of look what's happening in culture
and kind of see what everybody's talking about. And again
everybody is talking about Candice. And when I was done
with this research, I think, you know, you came in,
you said what's wrong? And I just feel like I
just felt gross. I felt gross doing this show.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Yeah, I mean we were kind of bummed because we
didn't want to talk about this again. But there are
so many new developments and I just think that it's
it's something that needs to be talked about.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
Unfortunately, unfortunately it does. And I think I've figured her out.
I think I know what she is, and we're going
to get into that in this episode. We're going to
talk a lot about that. We're going to talk a
little bit about the Gaza piece deal that's coming on,
and also is the economy, how's the economy doing. I
want to get into that just a little bit, maybe
towards the end of the show, because there's some signs
(05:05):
out there that things are, i don't know, maybe a
little bit shakier than we're hearing in the mainstream media.
But first I want to start off with this more
of these conspiracy theories that I want to get into
and debunk, and also just kind of point out some
of the tactics that are being used right now in
these Charlie Kirk conspiracy theory investigations into his death. So
(05:28):
this is Candace. She basically now has a new source
where she says with one hundred percent certainty that the
shot to Charlie Kirk to the neck was shot from
the front, and that there was no exit wound, and
that the fragments of the bullet ended up staying within
(05:49):
the neck. It did not exit, and it lodged into
his neck. But she makes this pretty audacious claim to
keep kind of some of this conspiracy theory alive. So
I want to play a little quick segment from her
on this topic. Here's Candace.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
As we continue this investigation, we are definitively getting closer.
So what do we recall? Well, we were told that
Charlie just had healthy bones, that it was a miracle
that the gun did not take his neck out, and
that his spine somehow stopped it. I can now officially
debunk that Marvel storyline, and therefore we focused our investigation
(06:31):
on what actually happened on nine to ten. Because I
have new information and I'm presenting it to the public today,
I first and foremost have to tell you right at
the top, I can't tell you exactly who the information
came from or which parties were involved in giving me
this information, because I don't want to get anybody in trouble.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
I think that's kind of an interesting take. First of all,
I want to pause it here for a second. She
is criticizing the FBI and the government officials police force
for not giving up all of the information. This is
one of her kind of go tos that, oh that's
kind of weird. Hmmm. Why isn't that an information given up?
(07:04):
That's strange. So she is now though, saying that she
is not going to give up that information. She just
want to divulge her sources. Couldn't you possibly think that
that's potentially what law enforcement is doing. I mean, they
do have a major investigation going on.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
Yes, but you can see what she's doing here. I mean,
there is so much distrust with the FBI and the
MAGA movement, which is warranted, by the way, and so
she's feeding.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
Off of that. Okay, but Trump's people are in there now,
So what she's basically the position that she's kind.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Of all Trump's people.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
No, but that right at the top they are you
got Dan Bongino and you got Cash Pattel. Right there
at the top, you have TPUSA working with law enforcement
to try to work this investigation through and get a
conviction with this guy. So anyways, she goes on from there.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
But I can say that I have positively verified something
about the injury that Charlie sustained to his neck that
I think is going to go a very long way
in terms of helping those of us who have been sleuthing,
those of us who want answers those of us who
are dedicating our time to this because what we are
being told by the authorities beggars belief. As John Arena
Mappin said, it's just simply beggar's belief. This is about
(08:21):
the injury. Okay, So Andrew Covett was I can tell
you telling the truth in part when he wrote that
very long tweet in which he tried to explain why
there was no exit wound.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
Andrew Covid is TPUSA representative.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Do you recall this long story short? He said, I'm
going to read it. I want to address some of
the things that the lack of an exit wound. About
the lack of an exit wound with Charlie, I'm usually
not interested in delving into most of this kind of
online chatter, and I apologize that this is somewhat graphic,
but in this case, the fact that there wasn't an
exit wound is probably another miracle, and I want people
(08:58):
to know. I just spoke with the surgeon who worked
on Charlie in the hospital. He said, the well, it
absolutely should have gone through, which is very normal for
a high powered, high velocity round. I've seen wounds from
this caliber many times, and they always just go through everything.
This would have taken a moose or two down in elk, etc.
But it didn't go through. Charlie's body stopped it. I
mentioned to his doctor that there were dozens of staff,
(09:20):
students and special guests standing directly behind Charlie on the
other side of the tent, and he replied it was
an absolute miracle that someone else didn't get killed. His
bone was so healthy and the density was so so
impressive that he's like the man of Steel. It should
have just gone through and through. It likely would have
killed those standing behind him too. In the end, the
(09:42):
coroner did find the bullet just beneath the skin. Even
in death, Charlie managed to save the lies of those
around him. Remarkable.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
So to kind of address this, because I think this
is kind of something we need to talk about. Is
the tone of that tweet that she is reading from
right there, from this representative of TPUSA and the surgeon
that she that he spoke to, this feels to me
kind of like a morale booster kind of a response.
(10:10):
This isn't a death certificate, This isn't something that's like official,
This isn't something that is going into the official autopsy.
This is a guy speaking about a man that everybody
loved and that somehow his body protected others from getting
killed from this shot. It wasn't something that I think
(10:31):
you can take everything that is in that statement verbatim
as evidence, let's say, in a court case.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Yeah, And he shared this shortly after Charlie's death, when
everybody was really really still in shock and in the
thick of the morning. And I feel like he did
was trying to make people in his way feel better.
Speaker 1 (10:53):
Exactly.
Speaker 3 (10:53):
Let's go on, keep that up for just a second,
because it's really around here. His bone was so healthy
and the density was so so impressive that he's like
the man of steel that we just went and something's
not right, something not right.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
Okay, So there's that kind of whole conspiracy tone again.
All right, This is not an official document. This is
not a death certificate or an autopsy. This is somebody
speaking about a man that had just died. Their families
reading all of these things. The loved ones is reading
all of these things, and she is taking every word
of it and breaking it down. And she's not a
(11:28):
dumb person. She should be able to discern that as
somebody that is taking on this role as a quote
unquote investigative journalist. Now this is just it's just.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
I find the whole thing so weird. This was her
friend and she just she can't stop talking about it now.
It just feels like she's just using it for content.
It just it just does not sit well with me
at all. I don't like it leaves a bad taste
in my mouth.
Speaker 1 (11:53):
What's going a lot of stuff It's not right.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
I just don't know why a surgeon would be saying
something that actually only the medical examiner, somebody that specialized
in forensics could really contry. Guess a surgeon can tell you,
or actually any personal common sense can tell you that
your bone density is better when you're younger. But this
seemed a little bit too performative. Now I can tell
you Pity is telling truth about is that Charlie's neck
(12:19):
indeed did stop the bullet without question, Okay, And this
is going to dispel a lot of theories that are
out there. And I'm telling you this one hundred percent.
Charlie Kirk was shot from the front and the bullet
did not exit, and at least a fragment of the
bullet was recovered from his neck, and I'm going to
(12:42):
tell you exactly where it was recovered from. I have
fact checked this information from multiple sources. Now, if actually
missing on this for a little bit over a week,
right around here, so think about almost in line with
your shoulder blade, right in the center. Now, why is
that helpful because it gives us a bullet rejector Okay.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
No it doesn't. It does not give you a bullet trajectory.
I know a little bit about physics because of a
master's and applied physics, and knowing where it landed does
not give you a bullet trajectory. You don't know if
he was turned a little bit here, turned a little
bit there. You don't know if it bounced off something.
Once the bullet entered it hits the skin, it hits
(13:24):
a collar bone, it hits a spine, it starts to
bounce around in there, it breaks up if it's certain
kind of ammunition, because there's different kinds of ammunition. Once
it hits an object, it is impossible to know with
certainty the trajectory of something because, especially when she's talking
about it in the way that she's talking about it,
(13:46):
finding the bullet in the location that you found it
in it could have bounced around in there and hit
off other things. So she's wrong on that.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
And it was stopped and a fragment was pulled from
I think right, if you're just touching your spine in
line with your shoulder blade, that leads us obviously to
the part that he's maybe not being forthcoming about. They
did not recover a bullet from a thirty HODD six.
They didn't recover a bullet from a thirty odd six.
(14:14):
Just didn't happen. Okay. If it found a thirty odd
six bullet, Charlie's death certificate certainly would have reflected that.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
No, that wouldn't I'll get to that in a second.
Speaker 3 (14:23):
In suicide situations, that's just one example. Medical examiners feel
free to chime in. I've spoken to quite a few,
But when the gun and the bullet are known, they
are reflected onto the death certificate. Okay, there is not
one reflected onto Charlie Kirk's death certificate.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
It wasn't a suicide, by the way, So that's a
bad example. A suicide would mean that the gun and
the casing and everything was right there with the body. Okay,
But she's off on that, and I'll get to that
in a second.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Because they did not recover a bullet from a thirty
odd six hunters and military men rejoice. It turns out
that common sense still rules the roost. Okay, you guys
were right. You're absolutely right. And this is why I
hate politics, because it requires us to submit to the
idea and we were all somehow born yesterday.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
Okay, So let's get to this for a second. The
death certificate. When you have somebody that's going for the
cause of death and in putting the cause of death
onto a death certificate, these people are not ballistic experts.
If they were to guess at the caliber of the
bullet and put that in a death certificate, they jeopardize
(15:34):
a case if they were to get that wrong. All right,
What they do is they describe what is the cause
of death. They describe the wound, and they describe the
fragment that they find. They are not going to describe
the caliber of the bullet that is launched into a body,
because in this case it's fragment. They're not going to
(15:55):
be able to tell the caliber from that. Okay. And
if you go to the CDC's recommendations on how to
fill out a death certificate for a gun wound that
somebody died from a gun wound. It is pretty informative,
and they have one here in the describe how injury
(16:15):
occurred shot by another person using a handgun. Okay, there's
no caliber listed in this example. This is not something
that a medical person is trained to do. You're talking
about building a case to be able to take somebody
to court and put them away for life and potentially
(16:37):
give them the death penalty. You're not going to rely
on a medical examiner.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
To give you ballistics information.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
Exactly, not going to happen, exactly. Let's go on that.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
It really can just life really can just be a
Marvel comic with people that are I guess DC comic
where there are men of steel that are able because
they're young to stop three thousand pounds of energy that
is coming at them. That didn't happen. So where does
that leave us, guys? Well, the part that is now
(17:08):
extraordinarily suspicious is that Andrews claiming that he had a
conversation with the surgeon who offered up the idea that
it really was just your modern Christian miracle, that Charlie
was just young and his bones had a lot of density,
which made him stronger somehow than a cape buffalo. Enough
push ups and asparagus, and you too can stop three
(17:30):
thousand pounds of energy coming at you. What are we
to make of that? What are we to make of
the fact that Charlie did not do that? Actually, it
means that he was shot with a completely different kind
of gun, obviously, okay, the kind where this would make
sense that it didn't cut through him, the kind where
(17:51):
it would make sense that outside of an artery effectively
exploding from the front, there was you know, his neck
didn't explode, which that particular weapon that they were trying
to tell us Charlie was killed with would have gone
through about seven x.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
So she is basing her entire theory on the fact
that it did not say in the death certificate that
a thirty to six bullet was recovered. She's claiming that
it would clearly have been in the death certificate if
it was recovered. There I could pull up death certificates
where somebody was shot with a gun wound and or
(18:33):
with a bullet wound, and that do not have the
caliber of the bullet within the death certificate. Okay, so
now she is setting this up that there was another gun,
a different gun, and she is about to make a
incredible claim. And we're going to get to that right
after the break. Licorice, Licorice, Where art thou licorice? If
(18:56):
you listen to Red Pilled America, you know that I
love licorice. And there is no licorice in America better
than the delicious gourmet licorice made by the Licorice Guy.
The Licorice Guy is simply the best. What sets their
licorice apart is its flavor and freshness. They have a
great selection of flavors to choose from, like red blue, raspberry, black,
(19:17):
and green apple, just to name a few. The freshness
of the Licorice Guy is unlike anything you've ever tasted
in licorice before. Seriously, if you haven't tried licorice from
the Licorice Guy yet, then you ain't living life right.
Trust me, you will not regret it. It's time to
dump that store bought liquorice but so hard it'll break
your teeth, and get yourself the soft, fresh stuff from
(19:38):
the licorice Guy. What I also love about the Liquorice
Guy is that it's an American family owned business. It's
made right here in the beautiful US of A. We
are big proponents of buying American and supporting American workers.
Right now, Red Pilled America listeners get fifteen percent off
when they enter RPA fifteen at checkout. Visit licoriceguy dot
(19:59):
com and enter RPA fifteen at checkout. That's Licorice dot com.
A ship daily. Treat yourself and those you love and
taste the difference. You're listening to Red Pilled America's vamboogie.
Join the Fanbam. Go to Red Pilled America dot com
(20:20):
and click join in the top menu. Support storytelling that
aligns with your values, and make sure to check out
our new videos over at YouTube and Rumble. Just go
in the search bar and type in Red Pilled America
Podcast and you will find them, or check our show notes.
So when we left you, Candice was coming up with
this theory that there was a second gun, or there's
(20:43):
another gun that was actually the gun that killed Charlie Kirk,
and her theory is based on the fact that in
her according to her source, maybe she got a hand
handle on the on the death certificate, but the desk
certificate does not include the caliber of the bullet. I
(21:03):
can go online right now and find bullet wound deaths
that do not include the caliber of the bullet. Those
people are not ballistics experts. They are not qualified to
give that kind of an assessment, especially if it is
a fragment of a bullet. Her claim is is it
it was not that type of bullet, because that kind
(21:25):
of a bullet would have blown out his neck and
would have gone through seven necks. By the way, MLK
Junior was shot with a thirty odd six and killed,
and the bullet was lodged, there was no exit wound.
That is information that's out there on the archive, the
National Archive. You can go check that out. It happens.
(21:47):
It depends on the caliber, excuse me, the kind of
bullet you're using, the kind of ammunition you're using. But
she's going to go on right now and come up
with a new theory.
Speaker 3 (21:57):
You will recall that throughout all of this or during
this mayhem. Rather, there were people who were insisting, by
the way they're on the ground, the witnesses that were
insisting that they heard multiple shots.
Speaker 1 (22:09):
All you need to do is grab multiple videos. There
are so many different videos of different angles on this
and all you hear is one shot. She's going on hearsay.
She plays a clip of somebody that you can kind
of hear in the background saying I heard two shots.
She's going on somebody that said something like that. Do
(22:30):
it yourself. Listen to the video yourself. You will hear
one gun shot here. It is not counting gang violence. Great,
it's one shot. That is one shot here. She goes
on with her theory.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
Now, for those of you that are still caught up
in what I just told you, which is that, for
a fact, Charlie was shot from the front, so we
know the bullet directory. There's no game here. There's no
magic bullitz. It's a smaller weapon.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
By the way, I believe he was shot from the
front as well, and that it was a single shot,
and that it got lodged to his neck. That we
would know if there was an exit one. But she's
saying this, we know this for a fact. She might
know this for a fact because she's claim to see
the death certificate, But we don't know this for a
fact because we aren't seeing the death certificate.
Speaker 3 (23:19):
Okay, your ears didn't betray you. My ears didn't betray me.
We definitely did hear a very recognizable sound of a
rifle shot. But I'm telling you that Charlie wasn't hit
with that rifle. And there is not a medical examiner's
report or a death certificate which will stipulate otherwise it
doesn't exist. So what exactly are the FEDS building their
(23:42):
case on vibes or sheer corruption? Because I'm thinking it
might be the latter, and who would be the person
that can make that fit? Look, I did receive a tip,
and guess what, there was another person in this never ending,
brand new cast of characters that was also involved in
this story. In this person in an email insisted to
(24:05):
me that this is somebody that we should look further into.
That's the medical examiner. It is a woman named doctor
Dedra Weiss Amaro is her name, and she blew in
from California. She was announced as the new state medical
examiner in May of twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
Okay, I mean, so we have so many different corrupt
people in this now. We have TPUSA is corrupt, we
have the FBI is corrupt. We have a medical examiner
now that is corrupt. We have all the higher executives
over at TPUSA is corrupt. There's a lot of people
in on this. She's going to talk later about an
engineering company is corrupt, but she goes on with this theory,
(24:44):
and this is what I really want to get to.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
It is likely that a rifle was fired to muffle
the sound of a smaller gun, which maybe actually kind
of had to if we're considering the trajectory that I'm
telling you here to here kind of had to come
from the front of Charlie. And I will say that
is now my well informed opinion, well informed opinion, that
(25:10):
we are looking for a person that was a lot
closer to Charlie and likely in the audience. And that
goes a long way, by the way, in terms of
trying to explain why they're maybe hiding the footage from
behind Charlie's head. Maybe that is the reason that that
footage was so crucial first and foremost, and tons of
(25:31):
other cameras that one gets grabbed first. It seems to
me that there's a lot of hiding, and there's definitively
a lot of lying that's going on. I told you
Tyler Boyer lied. He just lied. The person who took
the cameras down was absolutely not instructed to do so
by law enforcement. He just wasn't. Okay, So why say that? Also,
(25:51):
why grab the one behind his head first of all
the cameras? Why that one first and foremost?
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Okay? So now she's implicating Tyler Boyer as in on this.
And when I heard this, I'm thinking, has this woman
ever shot a gun in her life? Because what she
is claiming happened is there is somebody else in the
crowd that pulled out a handgun of a smaller caliber.
(26:18):
This man or woman pulled out a gun in front
of everybody, aimed it at Charlie and shot him right
in the neck. If you have ever shot a gun,
you would know that. You would hear like, how did
they sink those two gun shots? She's claiming that there
(26:40):
was another gun shot from another spot that was used
to muffle a smaller caliber gun.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
There was a lot of practice. They practiced many many times.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
So they sinked it. Yeah, they sinked it perfect They
sinked it perfectly. Let's claim let's claim that it's like
you know, Mark Wahlberg's movie The Shooter where it was
like electronics sink. Okay, let's claim that it was that.
Why not just use the smaller caliber for the other
For the other gun, you could use a twenty two
or twenty two shot from a certain distance also has
(27:13):
good aim as well too, if you're shooting for the
neck and you're shooting for the jugular and you have
that kind of But she is claiming this man stood
up in this crowd with a gun. All you have
to do is look at the videos of the crowd.
You would see like almost like a doctor hits your knee,
check your reflexes. You would see the heads all moved
(27:34):
to that area to where this potential second other shooter
is or where another shooter is. You have no evidence
that there is another shooter. And the only evidence that
she's basing all of this on, according to the way
that she's pitching this is the fact that there is,
in her eyes, the fact that there is no thirty
to six within the death certificate. This is beyond shoddy journalism.
(28:00):
This is trying to take the infra that you have
in front of you to weave together a conspiracy theory.
It's shocking to me that she thinks that she can
get away with this to her audience but here's the thing.
She's gotten away with so many other mistakes. She knows
that her audience isn't going to call her out, or
she's not going to be called out on this stuff.
(28:22):
This is the tool of the conspiracy theorist is to
bring up questions, constantly bring up questions and don't provide
answers to those questions. That is the tool of the
conspiracy theorist.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
It's funny because I didn't ever really stop to think
about what a conspiracy theorist she really is. What I
see is going on here with Candace is that she's
clearly a woman who has been rattled by this assassination.
And I think that this is bringing up a ton
of fear for her personally, and she is And I
(29:00):
feel like I'm being great here in saying this about her,
and that this is why she's gone down this path.
I feel like that fear has crippled her personally and
has completely clouded her judgment.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
You might be correct on that there might be some
trauma associated with her reaction to this.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
I promise you she's afraid. She has four small children.
What is she going to do? How is she going
to send those kids to school.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Well, she opened up. She's one of the segments recently
with you know, being late because she had homeschooling starting.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
So yeah, I mean she's scared.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
She's scared.
Speaker 1 (29:38):
Shere's the problem with all of that is that she
is implicating other people in this man approach to investigation.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
And I'm in no way saying that what she's doing
is right.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
I mean, she's basically claiming Tyler Boyer is now complicit.
She is now implicating another person, and she is claiming
that that other person had fore knowledge of Charlie Kirk
being at executed, publicly executed. And this is such an
egregious air that she is making that we can easily
(30:12):
debunk and we're going to do that in Part two.
Go over to Part two right now and join us
over there as we continue this analysis of these horrendous
conspiracy theories that are out there on the death of
Charlie Kirk.
Hosts And Creators
Adryana Cortez
Patrick Courrielche
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!