>A human husband and father known as Charlie Kirk is either
>A) dead
>B) alive
>If A then whodunit?
>If B then WWG1WGA, Patriots in Control.
This is what a good lawyer would start with.
Plain fact is, none of us "on line" have what we need in the way of real evidence to know what happened to Charlie at all.
I have not seen one anon capable of walking into a courtroom with real proof of anything that could sway a jury yet.
Videos?
Really?
On the internet?
In the swirling world of AI?
Blurry crap at that.
With all the national, and even international motives on the part of various parties, for such a crime out there?
I've seen magicians do things like this live on stage, and we have all seen movies similar to the videos circulating.
I see a lot of AI contaminated evidence?
Today, we live together in a timeline where men masquerade as first ladies, and fake presidents wear masks in fake Whitehouses.
All of history could be a lie?
And while don't approve of any of it, I myself am just fine.
Because God wins, no matter the "timeline".
What do we KNOW?
No autopsy report yet. (Of course, autopsy is not necessary if the death was well witnessed, correct?) but… is that not a chicken and egg thing?
By not doing autopsy, it forces the conclusion of an assassination and a death.
Real evidence is lacking. I mean the kind that ends up in front of a jury.
Are we watching a movie?
Could be.
Or is this one of those "not everything will be clean" moments, like COVID, where the deaths pile up as real evidence?
I see a narrative being pushed by FBI, "governments" , local and federal alike.
Possibly, the military (white hats) sure.
I see public skepticism. (good)
Appears both black hats and white hats have reasons for hiding evidence, and going with the dead Charlie narrative, whether it's true (truth) or not.
If we cant prove he was even shot (or even by who from what direction) with the video evidence we have, then, we are left with the above 2 possibilities for the moment, to hold on to, open minded.
Remaining in this "unknowing" state of mind is good for anons. Great minds can stay comfortable in their own skulls, entertaining alternative hypotheses, without adopting any one in particular. This is the power of leaving the mind open for new evidence. It is the power of critical thinking, so, anons can be encouraged by the questions. There are many. That is as it should be.
Once you choose to "just believe" you know, (without sufficient evidence), you might be more comfortable, but your mind is closed to new information.
What to do.
If Charlie died, then all possible avenues questioning "who dunnit" are viable, and the narrative being pushed, is useful for purposes of exposing the enemies within.
We should give ourselves permission to go with the dead Charlie narrative, one eye open, and continue the "who dunnit" digs, from every angle, with all evidence.
Anons love to dig anyway.
If the truth is, Charlie was killed off by white hats because his life was in real danger, and at some point we actually find solid evidence of this, anons will have to ask:
Would it be more wise to stay with the "Charlie died" narrative, for Charlie's sake?
What is the wisest thing to do then?
A. Truth A: Charlie was assassinated:
1) Take care of his widow and children while we stop tolerating the evil. I REALLY like the firing going on. Cleaning house. The young people want to clean out the colleges.
Parents want to clean out their schools.
Seems wise to help them. Follow the money. Eradicate Antifa, and all enemies of our Constitution that we find within. The institutions need a Constitutional scrubbing, up and down. ZERO TOLERANCE for any and all alternative ideologies to the Constitution and rule of Law.
B. Truth could be Charlie is alive and heading for witness protection?
Then we should be shouting out a debt of gratitude to him, after looking at what he built for us, before he had to exit stage left. If he is alive somewhere on the planet, he will get the message.
We have the right to thank Charlie.
A true Christian Patriot.