All Episodes
Previous
Jan. 12, 2026 - Lionel Nation
29:33
Will We Ever Find Who Really K*lled Charlie Kirk?

Will We Ever Find Who Really K*lled Charlie Kirk?

|

Time Text
I hope you're paying attention because the issue, as I said before, is exploding.
At first, this was about Candace Owens.
What does Candace Owens feel?
Candace Owens with Brigitte Macron or Candace Owens with Charlie and Erica and it was very interesting and fascinating, but it was all centered towards her.
It was about her.
Still is, but not entirely.
Because she drew attention and because everybody came after her.
Everyone.
Specifically Ben Shapiro and others where she was crazy and a lunatic, especially those people who wanted to take over TPUSA, but Erica Kirk supposedly took over, though I think she's being duped, but that's another story.
But all of a sudden, this thing changed.
And then it went from her, it went from, and this is a very important issue, it went from Candace Owens to TPUSA to fraud to also the recurring story of this.
Do you believe the official narrative that Tyler Robinson alone was responsible for the dispatch of Charlie Kirk?
Do you?
I don't.
I don't.
Now, remember something.
Let me stop right there.
And this is important because I've been doing this a long time.
As a lawyer, as a former prosecutor, and somebody who's been doing this for 38 years in this talk radio biz sort of thing.
When you don't, listen carefully.
When you don't believe a story, when you say, I don't believe the official narratives, like I never believed the official narrative of 9-11, which I'll go into one day, but that doesn't mean, for example, A, I have a better narrative that works.
B, I have the truth.
C, I have the evidence of some kind of cover-up.
Or D, I have an alternative theory.
No.
No.
It's, I don't believe it.
If you go to a comedy club and somebody tells you a joke and you don't laugh, you don't have a duty to come up with a better joke.
If you say, well, that's not funny.
They can say, well, then tell me what's funny.
He's like, that's your job.
It's your story.
I don't have to clean this thing up.
I always question, for example, regarding 9-11, I said, how is it that people knew the name of Hani Hanjor, who was one of the terrorists who flew the plane into the Pentagon, which is, I mean, involves an aerobatic skill that nobody has.
But anyway, I said, I don't really believe that they would have known.
Well, then who is it?
This is what people tell me.
Oh, yeah, well, who did it?
Or they'll say, well, what are you saying?
Are you saying we did it?
Are you saying it was an inside job?
I said, I'm not saying anything.
I'm telling you, I don't believe your story.
It's your story.
You come up with a better one.
So that's number one.
Keep that in mind.
So if you say, for example, I don't like this.
I'm not buying this, Charlie.
Fine.
You don't have to come up with a version of that.
That's number one.
Number two, this has nothing to do with liking anyone.
You don't have to like Candace Owens.
You don't have to like Erica Kirk or like Tucker or not like Ben Shapiro.
I am completely neutral as to these people.
I've never met any of these people.
I've shared some interviews a couple of times with Tucker, but that's it.
I've never met him.
I don't know who these people are.
And there are things that Candace has said in terms of subject matter that I may have disagreed with.
I like her.
I respect her a lot.
But it's not about liking her.
It's what she's saying.
I always tell people, read the transcript of what she says.
Or anybody says, do you agree with this?
Yes, that's fine.
Not, do you like her?
I don't like her.
This is all personal.
People personalize it.
It has nothing to do with liking anybody.
I'm not liking anybody.
I don't like people.
Alex Jones has said some wonderful things which I think are terrific.
He said some other things which I disagree with.
Not because he's crazy.
Not because I don't like him, because I don't share it.
It doesn't mean any, it doesn't mean I don't like him.
So let's lose this liking.
Well, you know, a couple of times, you said you didn't like Candace Owens.
Nobody said that.
What is this, third grade?
No.
So remember this?
So rule number one, if you don't believe a particular story, you don't have to come up with an alternate one.
And they're going to tell you, oh yeah, what do you think?
Well, who did it then?
No.
And number two, this is not about personalities.
It's not about liking.
I found out, believe it or not, in life, that some of the people that you thought who were absolutely just, you would hate them when you met them, turn out to be the nicest people in the world, and vice versa.
There are other people, a little hint, never meet your heroes.
If there's a rock star or some, don't meet them, because I guarantee you 90% of the chance of the time, they're going to be weird and you're going to wish, oh my God, why did I ever do that?
Anyway, enough about that.
So let me follow up with this.
What do we do with all this stuff?
There's been some absolutely, I don't have their names, but there's some incredible, they call them basement YouTubers or crowdsourcers who are brilliant in what they've been able to come up with.
So the question you should ask is, and I'll ask a question for you if you don't, what do we do now?
Let's say this goes on for a year and we have proof, positive, let's assume.
And I do a lot of assumptions.
Assume arguendo, as we say in law.
Assume for the sake of argument.
Arguendo versus innuendo, which is an Italian suppository, which is an old joke.
Assume that there's fraud.
Assume that we think there's evidence of another shooter.
Assume, assume, assume.
What happens?
How do you force the federal government, the DOJ, the Attorney General of wherever, to act on it?
What if you independently say, I've got into, believe me, this has been since day one.
What if you find information?
All of the Kennedy assassination theorists, and let me also say something, a little time out.
That person who might be in their basement, we always talk about basements on YouTube.
That person who might have been in their basement, that person who might have been on their kitchen table, a man, a woman, a kid who might curse, might wear a funny hat, may provide some of the greatest information of all time.
There is nothing, there is nothing that makes somebody a journalist.
Nothing.
Not a license, not a degree.
In fact, one time they asked Roger Ailes, the founder really of Fox News, they said, do you think that journalism, journalists should be licensed?
He says you only need a license to cut hair.
And that's true.
So a lot of these great folks, I don't care what they look like.
I don't care if you like them.
Listen to what they're saying.
Some of the best stuff I've ever seen are from just a variety, a legion of great commentators and investigators.
So that's that.
But let me go back to the question.
When citizens suspect a charity like TPUSA, Turning Point USA, of fraud or self-dealing or misuse of donor funds, the law gives them no power to prosecute directly.
And that reality explains much of the public frustration that you might feel because enforcement authority is kind of fragmented and it's slow and it's largely invisible with three primary paths: okay, the IRS, state attorneys general, and the Department of Justice.
Okay?
That's it.
And none of them move quickly or transparently as the IRS regulates tax-exempt organizations through complaints like Form 13909, which allows citizens to submit public filings, payment patterns, documentation, but it never confirms investigations.
State Attorneys General oversee charities operating or soliciting in their states and can pursue deceptive fundraising or breach of fiduciary duty, as happened with the NRA.
Yet, yet they are political actors who choose cases strategically, often sitting on sensitive matters for years.
And the DOJ generally enters only when there's clear criminal predicates that exist, usually after referrals and often avoid cases that would fracture a governing coalition, which is why, by the way, many people ask how likely a Republican Trump DOJ would be to expose what critics describe as the largest Republican fundraising vehicle,
if doing so risks political blowback, and why questions surrounding Charlie Kirk, including lingering doubts about the Tyler Robinson narrative and unresolved,
I guess, governance and financial structures are unlikely to be revised absent new concrete evidence since death investigations are local and fact-driven and typically closed unless reopened, while financial matters would move through civil regulatory channels, not criminal channels.
And this structure explains why it always looks like nothing happens.
Even as independent crowd-sourced reviewers read Form 990s and Schedule Gs and vendor contracts addressing timelines and documents regarding what's been talked about is about roughly almost $20 million in questionable payments to vendors and insiders and related entities,
including continued payments to a banned vendor, it is alleged, followed by a rapid entity switch, fundraising fees paid to employee-connected companies, compensation volatility across entities, vendor boards staffed by nonprofit executives and family members.
They love to use the word opaque, but opaque vendor ownership and weak oversight, signals all of which may be legal or may trigger compliance violations, depending on disclosures, okay?
There's notions of recusals and fair market value documentation and independent approvals and why talking publicly doesn't kill cases if grounded in documents because regulators respond to evidence patterns, not tone, while reckless claims can muddy waters and muddy waters.
And, you know, sustained documentation often nudges institutions to act later, if at all.
And this is where Candace Owens matters regardless.
Now, let me stop for a second.
Let me just go through this.
Think about a case, about this one case where this fellow by the name of, I believe his name is Epstein.
You might have heard of him.
He was alleged to have dispatched himself while in federal custody.
And I am telling you, you have to be a lunatic or completely devoid of any understanding whatsoever of medical fact or forensic laws or anything if you think he did this to himself.
And I don't want to go through this, but I will tell you one thing.
Whenever I would do a closing argument, either it's a prosecutor and defense, I always think, what's the main thing?
Give me one fact.
Don't put me through all this.
Three tops, or give me the main thing.
It's like, okay, here's one.
Here's why I know, and we all know, and everybody knows, why Jeffrey did not do himself in.
There was a bone, I do this very quickly, a bone called the hyoid bone.
It's under your mandibles in the back.
It's suspended.
It's not really, it's the only bone that's not really attached or anything.
And when it is fractured, it 99.999% of the time indicates some type of asphyxiation or strangulation or something involving a pressure in terms of, you know, of anterior to dorsal crushing.
You can get it by getting up, maybe a chop to the throat or some kind of, you know, accident, but you do not get it by ligature.
It was clearly fractured.
Thyroid cartilage, clearly fractured.
Everything else, particular hemorrhaging and levity and all that other kind of stuff.
This is a forensic thing.
And by the way, when we talk about that, and when we talk about Charlie and his ultimate fate, you're going to have to go through things like entrance wounds and bones and fragment and ME's reports.
And it's not about conjecture and who would benefit.
You know, qui bono, qui protest.
No, no, no.
It's about real, real, specifically kind of somewhat boring medical reports, forensic reports.
That's what we give me, give me records.
I don't want to, as a prosecutor, give me something that shows a blood alcohol level, tox reports, and medical examiners' records, and that sort of thing.
When Bill Barr said, oh, no, no, it was, you know, the S word.
You got to be careful with these words.
You know, let's call it the S word, okay?
And even Dan Bongino, what a joke, and Kash Patel, they looked at you and they said it because for whatever reason, either they're stupid, somebody told them to lie, or they're just liars that voluntarily.
But there's no way he did it.
Now, what's going to happen with that?
Nothing.
What about the files of this particular person?
Nothing.
JFK, nothing.
How about Robert Kennedy?
How about Robert Kennedy?
Bobby's father, Thane Eugene Caesar.
That's the guy who did it.
Have you heard anything about that?
No, he knows this.
I can't tell you why things just don't happen.
I don't understand this.
I don't understand it.
It's funny.
You're allowed to ask questions like this Rob Reiner case.
There's nothing to it.
It's open and shut.
Remember the Gene Hackman case?
Oh my God.
Where did she go to eat?
Was the dog in the closet?
Was he out of the closet?
Oh, they let you go nuts with that one because it didn't matter.
But whenever, and listen to me, whenever the government or anybody tells you to shut up, there's something to this.
How many times have they told Candace to shut up?
She's a, well, she's racist, but she's an anti-Semite.
That means you're over the target.
Anti-Semitic?
What?
Anti-Semitic?
She hates Jews?
What?
She never done.
Well, she said things about Israel.
That's not anti-Semitic.
Here we go.
We get to that.
Whenever they tell you this, you're a racist.
You're a misogynist.
You're a transphobe.
But you can say anything you can about this country.
Okay?
So, first rule is: just don't expect anything to happen.
Number two, when people talk about it over and over again, believe it or not, the amount of time that is spoken about it habituates, it conditions people.
Habituation is when you lose any sensitivity to it.
It's like when you wear a watch or something for the first time, you say, God, this is kind of clumsy.
And then later on, you don't even notice it because you've habituated to it because novel stimuli aren't novel anymore.
Okay, there's that.
And there's an idea too that you don't want government boards, they don't like civilians coming and telling them what to do because if they were doing their job, they would have had this done.
So they're not going to be listening to you.
And nobody's watching YouTube.
And you can send all the stuff you want.
Nobody's going to be doing it.
So let me just cut it off of the path.
Don't expect anything to happen to this.
Unless, and here's the issue: unless it traverses that blood-brain barrier and it becomes so big, and the notion of fraud screams so loud that somebody does something about it.
Let me also explain: guess who you might be having to deal with?
You might have to reach out to the left.
It's weird.
Sometimes political issues develop strange bedfellows.
You might need an MSDNC or a CNN or one of those guys to bring this up.
Why?
Because they can't stand Charlie Kirk and everybody else.
They can't stand this.
So you're saying, wait a minute, I want to expose the fraud, but I don't want to expose Charlie Kirk.
Well, he's dead.
But I don't want to hurt the cause.
Well, then, what do you want?
How are you going to do this?
Quick story.
During prohibition, the forces that led to prohibition in this country, the Women's De Volstead Act, Women's Temperance Unit group, these women who were so afraid that alcohol was destroying their families and their husbands were becoming drunk and destroying families.
Guess who they teamed with?
Guess who they teamed with in order to push the notion of prohibition?
The Ku Klux Klan.
I swear to God.
The Klan and others believed that alcohol was, they were always afraid of the black man being hyper, the hyper-sexualized black man becoming so out of control that he would do rapacious and terrible things.
So consequently, anything they could do to stop this.
Remember Reefer Madness?
They were always worried about the black man going crazy.
So alcohol, they thought, would drive these people crazy and white women wouldn't be safe and all this other kind of stuff.
That's an embedded that we'll talk about that later.
So the women's temperature, a lot of these people talk like that.
Oh, I declare, Lord, have mercy.
Lord, guess who they team with?
The Klan.
Because they had The same goal.
You and I have, I believe we do, have the goal of justice for Charlie.
Where do you think we're going to get justice for Charlie from?
From Pam Bondi, the DOJ?
Hell no.
It might be from some leftist group who pushes.
So I don't want to go there yet, but this is about the cause.
This isn't about party.
And please, why you shouldn't also get into this thing about do you like so-and-so?
Don't get into this left versus right stuff.
But what Candace Owens and others are saying, it matters regardless of whether anybody likes her or anything because she did not invent the filings and the evidence.
She merely amplified them and reframing the issue from personalities to process.
You know, where did the money go?
Who approved it?
Which is what's being asked right now.
Were conflicts disclosed and were donors misled, forcing sustained attention that regulators notice over time.
Since, by the way, historically nonprofit scandals from Enron to the NRA took years to mature as outsiders assembled facts before institutions moved.
And the uncomfortable truth is that citizens are not powerless, but their power is indirect.
You can file complaints and repeat and escalate and be patient and all that kind of stuff.
But you have to understand incentives and trust, you know, documents signed.
It's a kind of a boring thing, you know, pain of perjury.
It's a boring thing, but it's a different story altogether.
It's very, very, very, very interesting.
Now, but here's the thing, and this is what I'm trying to tell you.
We have to persist with this.
So here's what I suggest.
Number one, let us join the coalition.
Let's form a coalition.
Whatever we call ourselves, it's the Coalition for Justice, Truth, the American Way.
I don't care, whatever you want to call it.
Next, let us stop this personality thing.
I don't care if I like people, I don't like people.
Bernie Sanders said some things in the past, which I thought, hey, that's terrific.
Somebody says, it's Bernie Sanders.
It makes sense.
There are sometimes people that I like who say things that I think are crazy.
Bobby Kennedy says some stuff regarding health that I think, I don't know where he gets this from.
But there's something in law called the doctrine of severability.
If you have a contract and there's a portion of the contract that is deemed somehow illegal or unenforceable, you remove that portion of the contract in order to make it work.
And that's the way you do it.
Just because something doesn't, something is wrong, you don't throw everything away.
So if you find something, if you find an Alex or Nick Fuentes, or if Nick Fuentes says something that makes sense, that doesn't lose its truth because he says something else, which you find racial or hateful or whatever it is.
See what I'm saying?
Look at the information.
Don't worry about labeling it right or wrong or true or biased or right-wing.
They always call Candace a right-wing.
She's a right-wing MAGA.
She's not MAGA at all.
She's right-wing.
She's a right-wing far-right.
And whenever you hear that, you know you're winning.
So listen to the cases.
Persist with this.
But if you want to go after fraud, it's boring.
Remember, that's how they got Capone, theoretically.
It's boring and it's fraudulent.
And also, I want to pursue something too.
Let me leave you with this before I forget.
If somebody says, who do you think you are?
Who do you think you are?
You're one of these, what, these internet experts?
Who gives you the right to say this?
Who in the hell do you think you are?
Well, it's a good question.
You're the same person that a juror is.
Who are jurors?
People that get off the street.
People who are just regular Joes, regular people, regular folks, regular Americans who find themselves in the position of sitting in the weighing and the evaluation of facts like anybody else.
They do everything from medical malpractice to the death penalty to hit and run to whatever it is.
So you don't need to be a doctor for you to understand whether the issue has been proved.
That's what you need expert witnesses for.
That's what we do.
So when somebody says, who do you think?
Who are you?
What do you know about Charlie Kirk, the caliber of the 30 out 6 and whether he had super, you know, krypton or titanium cervical boat?
No.
You look at the evidence.
You look at what the experts say.
And sometimes you're going to hear somebody who says things like, well, I happen to be a retired, there was one fellow I thought, it's very interesting.
I didn't follow up further, but I would certainly throw it into the mix of considerations.
He was a former Marine who believes that the wound that we saw, he thought it was an exit wound.
I'm going to pursue that.
But have you seen the medical examiner's report?
No.
Have you seen the toxic?
No.
Have you seen anything?
No.
No.
Where is this?
Look at Virginia Juffray, the woman responsible for in the Epstein camp, who supposedly committed suicide.
The number one woman, the woman who was so responsible for bringing everything to fruition, the woman who said she was feeling great, she was adding on to her house, that she was being happy, she formed a new contingent of people.
She was just building up steam.
It wanted justice.
Yeah, she offs herself right now.
And they even put a picture of her on Instagram I saw, which I think I could have sworn it was a morg shot.
Lavidity, fixed eyes.
I want you to hear something from me.
I want you to hear it from me, okay?
And especially if you're new to this, and especially if you're young, you are entering something that is going to blow your mind.
Listen to what I'm saying.
You're going to be so shocked at how little is done when people bring evidence, evidence forward that is so clear, so obvious.
The whole Tyler Robinson story, the whole bit, the text messages, I mean, just where's it.
Anyway, get ready for this.
I'm just saying, don't, don't.
People ask me, have I lost faith in the system?
Faith.
Faith has nothing to do with it.
Every now and then it gets it right.
For the most part, it does.
But there's a lot of important people who don't want the truth ever known.
There are people who don't want you to know anything because they just don't want you to know anything.
They want you never to be in the position of getting used to having the truth explained to you.
So they will always tell you, you're out of your mind, you're crazy.
Candace Owens is crazy.
She's a lunatic.
She's crazy.
You only take flack when you're over the target.
You only hear somebody call you crazy when you're close to it.
Believe me, I believe me.
I have, I, for the longest time, said, I think there's these, I think they're spraying something.
I wasn't the only one, but I said, they're spraying things in the sky.
Oh, what are you talking about?
What do you mean, those chemtrails?
No, it's geoengineering.
What are you talking about?
Now, it's absolutely, positively acknowledged.
And they call me crazy.
And a lot of other people, and it's true.
So get ready for this.
Wear it like a badge of honor.
If they call you crazy, you know you're on to something.
Never ever ask permission to ask any questions, period.
I don't care what it is.
And never let them stop what you're saying by giving you a name.
If you want to ask questions about Egypt or Israel or Gaza or anything, just ask the question, whatever it is.
It doesn't matter.
And we're going to do this together.
And we're going to persist.
But understand something.
Don't expect anything.
I don't want to kill your thoughts, but don't expect any kind of a haha.
You know, this is it.
No, this will just kind of go away.
And they'll hope that you'll forget it because, as Gorvadal says, we are the United States of Amnesia.
So thank you, my friends.
Thank you.
Does this answer any questions?
I've told people a million times, I'm a lawyer, was a former prosecutor.
People say, Are you a lawyer?
I say, yes.
Yes.
Or some people, one guy wrote me, I heard you don't like.
He didn't say that voice words.
He goes, I heard you didn't like Candace.
Somebody told me, Is that true?
You don't like her?
I said, What is who is?
What are we talking about?
Say, Woodward and Bernstein, did you?
That's a joke.
Did you not like G. Gordon Lindy?
Is it he likes you?
Nobody thinks like that.
All right, I've said enough.
Thank you for watching, my friends.
Thank you for your kind notes.
Thank you, by the way.
Do you think that there's a war on our children?
Do you think that child predation is a problem?
Good, me too.
Follow my wife at Lynn's Warriors on YouTube.
Incredible work.
You have no idea how much we go.
Just that alone blows my mind.
So Lynn's Warriors on YouTube.
Follow her.
And also, thank you so much for this.
Thank you for being a part of this.
Thank you for following me.
Thank you for your thoughts and comments.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you for everything.
Please like the video.
Hit that little bell so you're notified of live videos and new and new things.
I have five questions I throw at the end of this, kind of get the ball rolling.
Please comment, question, ask.
And you have been so kind and so wonderful and so brilliant.
So in any event, thank you so much for watching.
Have a great and a glorious day.
We'll have more of this.
Believe me.
Okay?
We have more of this.
▲
Export Selection