There are three background facets worth discussing in the Charlie Kirk assassination.  To wit, a fulsome historic reference is likely worth creating, so we can all evaluate information with a similar baseline.

(1) The background of events in the lead to Charlie Kirk’s murder; (2) the post-shooting activity of the FBI; and (3) the reality of motive carried by the 22-year-old assassin, Tyler Robinson.   All three of these issues are separate and distinct; however, some people are dangerously merging them together. This should be avoided.

To help avoid conflation that happens, it is worth addressing all three issues separately and comprehensively.  In this outline we address the first, the background events swirling around TPUSA and Kirk prior to the shooting.

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) is a donor funded organization.  Within the business of engaging causes of worth it takes money, often a lot of money, to run the core logistics of the operation.  With Charlie Kirk removed from TPUSA’s mission, I hope their donors and supporters remain fully engaged and are able to expand on his life’s work.

Back in 2022, the same background financial interests who were structuring the presidential run of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis also supported TPUSA.

Part of that collaboration surfaced in mid-August ’22, when DeSantis exited his five-days of silence in the aftermath of the FBI raid on President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate (August 8, 2022).

In the lead to the election campaign, DeSantis came out of his bunker directly into a promotional tour for his book, The Courage to be Free.

The Florida governor joined TPUSA as several events to increase his national profile.  As a natural outcome TPUSA was funded for a shot time by the same people funding the DeSantis long-term launch.  Many of these donors were already part of the TPUSA financial system; it was a natural convergence.

To his credit, Charlie Kirk viewed the DeSantis effort as supporting a solid conservative, a fellow in the bigger battle, and yet remained supportive of Donald Trump throughout the collaboration and into the presidential primary once DeSantis formally announced over a year later.

Recently, when discussing the tragic event of Kirk’s assassination, Tucker Carlson noted Charlie Kirk took a lot of donor backlash for a shift in his position around the issue of Israel and the overwhelming retaliation taking place in Gaza.

Both groups, professional evangelicals and strong Israel supporters, took exception to Kirk questioning the attack on Iran and the ongoing decisions by the Israeli government to continue bombardment of Gaza.  WATCH:

.

The donor backlash Tucker Carlson is referencing, is also evident in an earlier podcast segment Charlie Kirk did with Megyn Kelly about a month before his murder.   Again, for fulsome understanding it is worth watching the entire segment.

.

The reference Megyn Kelly and Charlie Kirk are outlining was/is a cultural shift amid a great deal of young people as it related to how they perceive Israel.  The issue was weighing on Charlie Kirk who was a strong supporter of Israel and was known as a voice for Gen-Z independent thinkers.   The issue was such an important topic for Kirk, he did an entire focus group discussion on it [SEE HERE].

From the perspective of Kirk, a distinction needed to be made between support for the nation state of Israel to exist, and criticism for the way the government of Israel was conducting the war against Hamas.   However, the pro-Israel donor class do not permit this nuance.

Additionally, Charlie Kirk was calling out secular Jews for funding the radical left.

.

Put the three issues together, (1) a reluctance for conflict with Iran, (2) concerns about how Israel had extended the Gaza conflict, and (3) direct criticism of Jews funding the radical left, and what you get is an overreaction by the Israel-first lobby calling Charlie Kirk ‘antisemitic’.

Charlie Kirk was not ever an antisemite. However, his soft touches on the third rail of criticism toward Israel created massive backlash from his donor base; again, hard-core evangelicals and wealthy donors of the Jewish faith. This is not coincidentally the same donor base who funded the launch and 2024 primary effort of Ron DeSantis.

Again, to his credit, in the two-months prior to his murder Charlie Kirk did not waiver from his position; a position that was entirely in alignment with the voice of the Gen-Z audience to whom he was connected most deeply.

However, due to Kirk’s history of unwavering support for Israel a shift in opinion was viewed as a risk. The need for control is a reaction to fear. A pressure campaign against Charlie Kirk was created by the aforementioned donor group.

This is the context that surrounded the assassination. This context is not connected to the motive of the murderer, nor is it connected to the motive of the FBI in the aftermath. This background just sits alone as the accurate context for some of the external pressures that were upon Charlie Kirk for the two months that preceded his death.

Against this context, the donor groups, individuals and organizations that were participating in the pressure campaign, then had another concern in the aftermath of the shooting. Would they be blamed? Would this, once again, feed yet another conspiracy theory against Jews?

That aspect explains the openly obvious media campaign that was waged by the donor groups, individuals and organizations in the aftermath of the shooting. What we saw was coordinated praise for Charlie Kirk by the same people who were criticizing him for a shift in tone and opinion toward Israel and waging the pressure campaign.

[SOURCE]

Again, WATCH:

.

Obviously, the people who were pressuring Charlie Kirk would be very nervous about being blamed, and that aspect directly surfaces in the way members of the Jewish community and Israeli government reacted to his murder.

The intent of this post is to create an honest record of what was taking place in the background prior to Kirk’s assassination.

The reason clarity becomes important is because without it, dangerous conspiracies thrive.

There is ZERO EVIDENCE any of these background ‘donor pressure’ issues had anything to do with the murder of Charlie Kirk, yet already online people are making direct and inferred connections that do not exist.

Israel did not kill Charlie Kirk.

An unstable ideological leftist named Tyler Robinson, who was living with his transgender boyfriend Lance Twiggs, killed Charlie Kirk because they hated him.

Tyler Robinson hated the purity of Christian values that Charlie Kirk represented.  Every day that Charlie Kirk spoke to their peers and dismantled the lies, was another day Tyler and Lance felt threatened by the return of a moral society that was the foundation of Kirk’s advocacy.

Do not let the issues conflate.

Yes, Charlie Kirk had become openly critical of the decisions being made by the Israeli government.  No, Charlie Kirk did not stop supporting Israel.

Yes, Charlie Kirk was facing significant backlash by the very influential Evangelical and Jewish donors to his TPUSA organization.  Yes, the influential donors were trying to convince Kirk to stop being critical of the Israeli government.  However, no, there is no evidence Israel had anything to do with the crazed behavior of a mentally unstable leftist who assassinated him.

If that changes, we will openly and honestly outline it as we do with all subjects of great interest and consequence; but right now, there is no evidence of any connection.

Pray for Charlie Kirk and his family.  Honor his legacy and support all the new awakenings happening as a consequence of this tragic and violent event.  Do not allow yourself to be draw into the dark imaginings of those who have an ulterior agenda.