Comment from a youtube video: "Even that Turning point kid was in the first 3 rows and was saying he heard the shot come from Charlie's right. Then 5 guys came and jumped this kids and attacked him and grabbed the microphone from him and shut him down. Who was that young man?" I saw that video. A young man was asked a question, but as soon as he started to speak, his team members of roughly the same ganged on him and pushed him away from the camera. It tends to reveal that something of a staging was taking place. It makes me ask: is Charlie really dead?

If it was truly a killing, how possibly could five young team members have known about it? Surely, if the Turning Point management had decided to murder him, only the top tier would know, not the youth. The shooting looked very authentic; I don't think it was faked. But I do think that there was a stage production in play, at least from Tyler Robinson.

I saw a video telling that Erika Kirk was in a beauty pageant owned by Trump, and thus it makes me wonder whether she had been an Epstein product. The video also told that she had been a "casting director," and I'm wondering the worst: was she working in crisis-acting for Intelligence? I wouldn't be asking if this murder didn't have a staged performance. The same video, featuring a young person who could very well be a lying leftist, claimed she was working for the U.S. military in Romania in an evangelical framework. The video then tells that local Romanians were accusing her Christian group of kidnapping children, and while Yahoo and others deny evidence for this claim, we'd expect the big powers to deny it. The video claims that people were on trial for stealing children to the UK and Israel from the Romanian town of Tandarei. I'm not giving this Tandarei link to Erika's family any credibility, as it seems a creation of the left.

On second thought, I've just added the following insert to my last update's discussion that involved Lorraine with Letters, Lauders, and Letts: "Lauders share the tree stump and motto of Lorie's/Larrys (share laurel with Lorraine's), and Wikipedia claims that Lori is Erika Kirk's mother. Mythical Leda (mother of Pollux), suspect as a form of mythical Leto (mother of Apollo), was married to Tyndareus, and there is a rumor online that Erika and or her family was involved in child trafficking to American-military personnel in Romania's Tandarei. Lorraine points to Babe's and Childs." I don't know what to say. If she's guilty, let God expose her. Otherwise, forget about it. Leto's are in Letter / Lauder colors and format.

You can click Lauders now, which loads them on another tab in order to load other surnames, to better follow the heraldic links.

I've got to elaborate, because it was only in the last update that I talked about PULLING CHRISTINE Peare's hips toward me on a stage, a pointer, I think, to the staging of Kirk's murder, for Hips' almost have the Phoenix/Fenwick Coat while the Kirks live in Phoenix. Miss Peare, when I first knew her, left me for LARRY, and Larrys are listed with Lorie's. They have a giant cup while Cups are also Culps in the "culpa" motto term of PULLINGs/Pullys. Christine's use cups while Christs have a rose-version Hips Coat.

Larry's surname is "Kepke" while Kepke/s/KOPke's were a Koop/Kupe branch. Therefore, the "RePULLulat" motto term of Lorie's/Larrys (same place as Trump-connectable Leggs) looks like part-code for Pullings/Pullys. The latter share the full motto of Patents/Pattens who in turn share the Shield of Orems/Orrins. Charlie was killed in Orem. "REPullulat" can be part-code for Reps, who were in Norfolk's Paston while Patten-like Pastons share the Child Coat.

Tandarei is in IALOmita county with a Iolamita river that was anciently the Naparis. Napier's come up as "PEERless," and IALO-like Yellows are first known in Oxfordshire with Peare's and "pistol" using Hopkins while Hips' are also Hipkins. The Lauders and Letters were used in the last update with Goose's to point to Trump-family schemes for Gaza property, and Napiers are said to have settled "Goffurdo Goosford" (Fife). Goose's/Googe's share the boar of Goffs/Gough's, in the colors of Giuffre's and Gofers, the latter first known in Oxfordshire. Gofers have the Erik saltire in colors reversed.

The stage that Peare and I were on was a wooden DECK, and the only event upon it was my pulling her toward me by her hips. Hips' look very related to Decks/Daggers who in turn share the Peerless/Napier fleur-de-lys. Peerless'/Napiers have the Tease/TECK saltire in colors reversed, and Tease's/Tecks are first known in Switzerland with the Ticino canton, the Ticino river of which flows to Pavia, where Pierro's/PERO's/Petri's are first known. The "Sans TACHE" motto of Peerless'/Napiers is translated, "WITHOUT STAIN." Stains are first known in Middlesex with Orne's/Horns, and Masseys were at Orne's Ferte-Mace. Pero's/Perino's are first known in Piedmont with Masci's while French Masseys have a "Tree WITHOUT LEAVES" while Laevi Gauls co-founded Pavia.

Peartree's/Patria's, in the Tien motto, share Pulling/Pully scallop as well as the giant STAG head of Trumps (Kepke colors and format). Stage's/Staggs use the stag head too. "Tiens" (Oxfordshire with Peare's) is a motto term of Squirrels/SQUARE's sharing the red squirrel with Decks/Daggers. "PalleSCERE" is a Pulling/Pully motto term. Christs, sharing the Peerless/Napier roses, are first known in Prussia with Decks/Daggers, both using similar Coats. Make of all this heraldry as you wish. It's giving me the creeps.

Back to Orems/Orrins. Orne's/Horns are expected in heraldic hunting horns, and Hunts/Hunters (Shropshire with Hopkin-like Hope's and Hopkin-beloved Pistols) use the saltires of both the Irish Kilpatricks/Sheera's and Scottish KIRKpatricks (Dumfries with Lorie's'/Larrys). Sheers/Shire's/Share's can be of the Squire/Square variations of Squirrels.

Even if there was a child-trafficking ring from Romania's Angel's, it may have not involved Erika, but rather one or both of her parents. I'll leave it at that.

That the Kirk couple never show the faces of their children begs whether they are stolen. On top of the strangeness of both reported parents of both Kirks, I'm willing to entertain something illegal in their not showing the childrens' faces. If true, it implicates Charlie. Erika's been recorded wearing the Maltese cross as a piece of Jewelry.

When emphasizing a stage in the last update via Miss Peare, I didn't know Erika had been a casting director prior to meeting Charlie. There are fake-Christian missionaries who abduct children, people who would have been far better off if they had never been born.

[Insert -- The day after writing here, I was watching a video telling of Erika's casting-director training, when CRISIS actor came to mind because I called Christine Peare, "Chris." In fact, the Kepke's/Kopke's and Koops/Kupe's both share a Coat like that of German Criss'/Christman (Austria with both Schere surnames and Christs/Kists) sharing the Coat of English Christmans, first known in Hampshire with Keppe's'/Kippers, Chase's, and with Cup-branch Copps in turn sharing the roses of Squirrel- and Deck-connectable Christs/KISTs. I was pulling her on the deck, and Pullings/Pullys happen to share the martlets of Christmas'. The Kiss'/Cush's share the Coat of CASTs/Cass'. CASTing director. The Coneys in the Christmas Coat are first known in Lincolnshire with the Custs sharing the Cass/Cast Coat.

Scayle's/Schools share the annulet of Benjamins (Norfolk). There is a Casting/Caston surname (Norfolk with Cast-connectable Case's) sharing the Coat of Lorraine-connectable Childs. Casts/Cass' have a "pair of scales" while Scale's, first known in Hertfordshire with Childs, can get us to Scayle's/Schools sharing the OREM/Orrin Shield. See that?

Lorraine's PANT stain, which I POINTed to as a probable pointer to Turning Point (see last update for that stain), took me undoubtedly to Pansys/PANTzers, and Coneys have a "pansy" in their Crest. It's Peerless'/Napiers who have a "Without stain" motto. Coneys are suspect from Cuneo province (Piedmont with Pero's/Perino's), beside Turning-like Turin. Perrins are first known in the same place as Lorraine's (share Child eagles).

Due to the giant Lorie/Larry cup, Copps and Coaps could have given Irish Kilpatricks their fleur-de-lys. The Wings if the Christ/Kist Crest are first known in Worcestershire with Squirrels and Chips/Chipmans while Chapmans/Chepmans are first known in Cambridgeshire with Casts/Cass. Wings/WINKs were once said to be first known in Perthshire with the Justine's/Justice's sharing the BORDER of Kepke's, Koops, Criss' and Christmans, and with Peerless'/Napiers sharing the red rose of Cups/Culps and their branches. Borders are first known in Somerset with the Wedge's (Vince colors and format) sharing the motto (includes "conSCIRE") of Wink-like Vince's in turn first known in Hertfordshire with Horns/Orne's and Childs. Pullings/Pullys have a motto phrase, "palleSCERE culpa."

There's even an Orphan/Orpen/Orbin surname, first known in Norfolk with Castings. The "Veritas" motto term of Orphans is translated "Truth" while I trace Truths/Trots/Troats to the Trotus river of Romania. The whole motto is "Veritas VINCit."

As I've said many times, the last time I saw Lorraine, about two years after dating her, was when sitting in a restaurant with Paul, and Pauls/PALLES', suspect in "PALLEScere," are first known in Yorkshire with Pullings/Pullys. I was pulling Chris' hips on a stage.

The first I can find the dream, where David Morley circled the sleeping bag as a pointer to Circle's/KIRKners (Silesia with Rose's), is in the 1st update in August, 2017, like so:

In the sleeping-bag dream, some 40 years later, it ended with Christine Peare coming over to my platform, and with me pulling her toward me from her waist. And the dream ended like that, much like a tease. It looks like Sleeps are to be part of the revelation, but I can also mention that Decks/Daggers use a split Shield in the colors of the split Maule/Morley Shield, and the latter use a "TECte" motto term suggesting something of Tecks/Tease's" (Peerless/Napier saltire in colors reversed).

The Phoenix-connectable Hips' wouldn't enter that waist-pull scene for some years later. WAISTells share the blue dove with George's, the latter first known in Dorset with PULLs/Pools and Palins/Pawleys. Pulling/Pullys and Pulls/Pools can both be shown as a branch of the namers of Pollok, a location that named Pollocks, and the latter not only have hunting horns, but an "audACTER" motto term as a possible pointer to "crisis actor." That's "AUDacter," and Aude's (Savoy with Gays) have a blue-Shield Coat version of the Pollets (Somerset with Paulins/Pallins and Pollock-connectable Roets) in the motto of Pulls/Pools. The other two Paulin surnames can be gleaned with Galli's and their Gay branch.

Crisis actors are used by American Intelligence to stage crisis events for political purposes. That's otherwise called, weaponizing of government against the political opposition. I'm fairly convinced that Chris Peare on a stage with me points to crisis actors, but then why was I on that stage with her? See "Louise" in the last update for a pointer to the Losee center, where Charlie was shot, for Louise was on a stage with Miss Peare before the latter came to my stage.

While writing this insert, a young robin crashed into my computer-room window and died beneath it. Perhaps an omen toward Tyler Robinson. End insert]

Erika's surname is very rare, and, because I've heard nothing about her father, her first name could give away that she's Trump's daughter, for he named his son, Eric (41 years old). It could explain why she was so affectionate toward Trump when he was with her at the memorial, even looking like Trump was a father figure to her. Just wild speculation. I apologize ahead of time to Erika if none of this is worthy of mention.

Her father is said to be "Kent Frantzve - AZ-Tech International, Inc." (linkedin page). On another page: "About AzTech International AzTech specializes in providing expert project and earned value management (EVM) solutions tailored for Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Energy (DOE) agencies and their contractors. With a focus on EVM consulting, implementation, compliance, and training, AzTech has been a leader in the field since 1992."

A comment in a video says: "Erica’s father is an arms dealer for Israel according to judge Napolitano..." Erika has said that her mother moved from Ohio to Phoenix as part of her military and Homeland-Security ties. Her mother, I heard, now works for the Department of Defence. One can really see here how Charlie was being depended upon for supporting Israel at this critical time where it seems intent on annexing Gaza. Possibly, her mother's Syrian and Lebanese background could make her Israeli by blood.

I'm open to the possibility that Erika was a Romanian orphan adopted by her mother when she was in Romania with the military there, perhaps even in Tandarei at the Naparis-river region. Near the end of this update, there's a video where Erika claims she met Charlie in Israel while she was with her mother.

I've heard one person remark that there was not one word about Charlie Kirk's parents at the post-funeral. Nobody pointed them out, no camera panned to show them, I'm not even convinced they were there. Fox said: "Not much is known publicly about Kirk’s parents, as they are not in the same political spotlight as Kirk." Maybe they just hate Charlie, maybe there's something else going on.

Were the Kirks signed up as CIA assets? Why was Charlie smiling large as he lay on the stage floor with his shirt covered in blood? Was he posing for the camera, having fun faking his death? I don't think so, but I'm starting to wonder. Anyone working with young people can also abuse young people. People who want to abduct young people will work with young people. Ask abused altar boys about that. Even a pedophilic catholic priest knows how to fake Jesus-devotion very well. Charlie doesn't strike me of being like that, however.

In the video below, there's an item appearing momentarily shortly after 7 minutes. This has got to be the real bullet, for it was shortly-after discovered, from another video camera, travelling beside Charlie's knee after exiting the neck:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnVMKZxqO_8

I have a question on whether a powerful bullet was used from the Mauser. We read: "Federal investigators found a .30-06 caliber Mauser rifle..." To explain why people are saying that a 30-08 bullet was used: "A 30-08, or more commonly known as a 308 Winchester, uses a bullet that is 0.308 inches (7.82 mm) in diameter." Then: "A 30-06 Springfield uses a bullet with a diameter of .308 inches (7.82 mm). The "30" in 30-06 refers to the 0.30-inch caliber of the bullet, while the "06" refers to the year 1906 when the cartridge was standardized." A 30-06 rifle uses a 30-08 bullet, but there are also 30-06 bullets with a little more power than the 30-08. My question is: can this rifle accommodate a bullet with less than 30-caliber power, and if so, why is nobody saying so?

I've also read that the Kirks never show their childrens' faces on public camera. That seems strange. Imagine the children growing up to see that their backsides are always to the public view in family pictures. That's abusive. Are they really their children? What's going on? Are they even married? Are they Intelligence actors under a contract to act married for only so long, and to then split up by faking a death? No. I must be having a crazy minute. I'm quite sure that Charlie looks authentically killed. Still, those questions linger.

When I learned that the couple live in a $6M home, I assumed the money came from the ministry, but someone says that Erica was a millionaire before she met Charlie. She attends a catholic church, but catholics don't necessarily tell people when they call themselves Christians. I cannot fathom how an Christian could attend a church where money is funneled to vaticanism, a church where men lead who know he Bible enough not to be honored as "father." Why would Charlie marry a catholic if he was devoted to Jesus?

When Erika put her head and soul on Trump's body, at the post-funeral, it was what one does to a father figure, but this is not what a Christian does with a non-Christian. If someone wants to argue that she was overwhelmed at the moment with sorrow, why did she flash the devil's horns at that very moment? Doesn't a Christian know enough, by now, not to flash that thing? She didn't care if the whole world of Christians saw it. She was more caught up with the energy of the wrong spirit.

You might skip to 27:00 in this long video, telling of a non-$piritual part of Turning Point's Christian nationalism, and just watch for a few minutes until you see the guy's income sky-rocket to more then $5M annually:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8D3rnJ7IueQ

This week, there is a video story going around of some faint liquid, not red, showing in two frames the instant before the bullet exits the throat. Anyone who chooses to believe that this was Charlie's ear-phone wire, after seeing that he wore no ear piece, gets suspect by me as a deviant supporter of the plotters. However, there are also video producers who have committed to a front-entry bullet who don't want to change their stories because they bragged about being right about a front-entry bullet. The image is clearly liquid, not a wire, and there is no large object showing as would be necessary if it were an ear phone.

In the first frame, the liquid is behind the ear mainly not in contact with the head, in contact only at one end. In the second frame, the liquid has flown outward to about a foot from the head. There is nothing that could cause a wire to do that at the instant the bullet strikes a man only in the lower throat. Even if the bullet strikes a wire at the throat, it's not going to yank the ear piece out of the ear and fling it upward. Besides, there are clear shots of the ear from the side that show no ear piece, yet those who claim that maybe it's invisible are suspect as supporting the killers. The FBI may wickedly conclude that it's a wire if the FBI continues to blame Robinson.

The Turning Point team knows he was not wearing a wire. The Turning Point team, now headed by Erika, if it's/she's truly Christian such that it/she promotes truth no matter that it contradicts the FBI or Utah police, would RUSH to tell the public, early this week, that Charlie wasn't wearing an earphone. Christians do not allow men innocent of the shooting to go to their executions, or even to wrongfully-driven criminal court cases. The image of this liquid will prove Robinson innocent of the shooting, but he then needs to explain why he didn't reveal who he was working with for his part in the crime.

To show how some people are given to wrong-think, here's from a video comment section" "I'm not buying it [the liquid-spatter claim], guys. I saw the video and being shot from behind doesn't align with more recent developments of his bone density stopping the exit wound from behind." This fly-by thinker, or accomplice, first assumes that the report is true that the bullet did not exit, then uses that claim to "prove" that there could not be bullet spatter at the back of the head on the bases that the bullet did not exit the neck. One error leads to another.

Someone is seeing evidence that the bullet exited, but denies it because the Turning Point team said the bullet did not exit. That team's leaders should be rushing to explain this liquid spatter. Give the people a story one way or the other. Let the surgeon admit to the words put into his mouth by the Turning Point. Did the surgeon really say that the bullet did not exit? Is this controversy just a minor thing? No, but it proves to me that Turning Point, now led by Erika, is covering for the real shooter. This plays as well to a faked killing as it does to a real killing either plotted, or condoned, by the team.

The Body Language Guy has revealed that he fully trusts the Turning Point team on its report of the bullet, which makes this video owner unreliable and compromised. Here's his video of this week on the rear-of-head entry-point theory:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRWMGCIydUY

Body Language Guy is being very desperate in protecting his "conclusion" of a frontal-entry theory. He spends useless time arguing that the angle of the shot would not strike the hair, but the bare skin below the hairline, and this argumentation is to deny the rear-of-head entry point, because no wound can be seen in the skin. But Body Language Guy knows better than to even present that argument due to the skull being present to the rear of the ear. Do you see how humanity is inflicted with further error due to pride in previous error? It's human nature.

The skull obviously deflected the bullet down, but as the liquid is not flashing-red in color, he has an opportunity, which he gladly takes, to continue denying what his own eyes see, and, besides, he doesn't even show the liquid spatter.

Body Language Guy, and the devious surgeon if indeed he said what's been reported from his mouth, are completely out-to-lunch when suggesting that the mere neck bone could stop the bullet from exiting the neck from a frontal-entry bullet. The bones of the neck aren't even attached as a solid stick. They do not make a concrete wall. 30-08s will penetrate a quarter inch of steel or more, we are hearing. DUH, it means that Turning Point is lying to us the same lie as the FBI. DUH.

The brain is not like a jug of pure blood. The skin is very thin at the skull. The brain may even have clear water. Therefore, why is Body Language Guy, a fellow Christian, making such a big deal about the liquid looking more like water than blood? Besides, the liquid is so faint, and moving fast too, that it might be scattering thin such as not to register red on a single frame. google AI: "Yes, the brain has water; approximately 75% of the brain is water, which is present both as a fluid within its tissues..." Body Language Guy, whose name is, Jesus, makes an ass out of himself for insisting that the chin motion of Charlie, because it goes down at the instant of the shot, can only mean that the bullet entered from the front. But a bullet from behind, three stories high, and striking at the middle of the head, on the skull, can also send the chin down, DUH. How about taking off those donkey ears, and admitting you were wrong, stubborn mule. Free yourself from Turning Point.

By the time of this video, Jesus gave his own memorial speech on youtube, and so he's been falling in love with Turning Point. That's additional reason that he doesn't want the rear-entry-point theory, because it starts to reveal that Turning Point is complicit with the very inconsistencies that he's been stressing for two weeks. He'll point suspicions at the FBI, but isn't willing to do the same at Turning Point.

The red circle that you see is not where the bullet entered. The red circle, I'm sure, if from someone else's video to show where the liquid spatter flies out, UPWARD from behind-and-BELOW the ear top. That's where the skull curves inward such that it can deflect a bullet downward.

The ground beneath the stage at the Turning Point event was paved over starting days after the killing. I assume that some soil was dug out and replaced with gravel in an attempt to recover the bullet that went into the ground to Charlie's front. In other words, when the bullet exited the neck, it tells you that the surgeon, the coroner, and Turning Point are lying when they say they have the bullet. I haven't yet heard that the FBI has seen the bullet, but if anyone does have the bullet and the fragments, the FBI would demand to have it/them, Therefore, the FBI is apparently going to claim that it has the bullet.

Here's the video owner who broke the rear-entry theory; if you don't want general background info on this event, just go to about 47:40, and wait to see what looks like a bullet coming for Charlie's head right where the spatter shows in another camera view:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAybJ2E1WlY

That bullet you see is a rifle "flash" according to another video owner who didn't realize it was the bullet. It didn't make sense for a barrel flash to be at the black shirt in which it appears. The bullet has come right over or beside the man in white cap, Frank Turek. After seeing this bullet, I suggest it's not from the bush, for that was to Charlie's direct right. It looks more like it comes from the building about 30 feet away, and behind, Charlie. There is no building wall behind the tent. It's open air underneath the red roof you see at 48:02.

If this is the bullet, expect stiff online opposition to that theory from those who support the plotters. Gray Hughes, who works with Paramount Tactical, is an imposter who supports government narratives to the point of making an idiot of himself, and fools his viewers with high-tech capabilities. The video below makes Paramount Tactical look more than stupid, more like a supporter of the plotters, yet Gray Hughes refers his viewers to Paramount Tactical's take on this issue. Gray Hughes into Wednesday of this week is still backing the Robinson narrative, and sourly mocks the rear-entry theory as if it's a great threat to him, because this stooge operates in the box of a government narrative, uninclined or prohibited to think out of the box:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAybJ2E1WlY

Gray Hughes doesn't think that a bullet from the bush area could explain the deflection out of the front of the throat, but he doesn't get out of his box, even when the whole world of normal investigators have rejected the Robinson theory that he continues to push. Maybe the shot was not taken from a person above the bush, maybe it was from a person on the roof above the bush, or on the roof with bush but elsewhere upon it. But Hughes is not open to such speculation as he sits in his dark box, where he insists on being a government idiot-box. He comes across like someone getting paid to say what he does, like an imposter, because he's not seeking the truth. It's now known that the roof-jump camera view first shows him running three seconds after the shot, without time to wrap the rifle in a towel, let alone time enough to dismantle it, and Hughes would know this. GRAY HUGHES FARCE.

Besides, the skull comes to an end behind the ear such that the bullet could strike the edge of the skull, and maybe the far back of jawbone too, such that a "slow" small bullet, even if originating at the bush, could deflect downward and frontward.

He instead tells his viewers that the splash of water/blood is a piece of Kirk's necklace or earpiece wire/string, even though there is exactly zero way to explain how a frontal-entry bullet could strike the earpiece wire/string, or the necklace under the shirt. The breastplate theory has been 100-percent debunked. Therefore, a bullet entering the skin of the throat one or two inches above the collar of the shirt cannot make the necklace or string/wire under the shirt do anything, let along fling away from the back of the head. Therefore, as he knows there's liquid in the brain, and as he knows a bullet can cause liquid to splash out of the brain, and as he knows the purported splash looks like a splash of liquid, Gray Hughes is an imposter (i.e. not an unbiased expert), clear as day, for outright rejecting this theory.

Go to 8:14 of the video below, where the one who broke this story is sharing a second possible source for the gun in a flash that to me looks like it's off of dark glass. I can't be sure whether it's glass, but if it is, it positioned perfectly to receive a reflection from a rifle on a roof having the bush that RangeDayPro points out. The liquid splash is at about 9:00, where you can see how daft Gray Hughes is to suggest that it could be his necklace:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFc3pRrjuLM

Time line to Tuesday night: 1) Candace Owens reveals she saw back-of-head camera view with no blood showing; 2) Turning Point, within hours, says bullet hit neck bone and stayed in the body; 3) within hours, the back-of-head theory into hair proved to be the best and only possibility; 4) within hours, on Tuesday evening, Candace Owens says she contacted a man who captured a man lying on the roof supposedly taking the shot, which scene has been seen by millions. But according to this cameraman, the one on the roof was in tactical gear taking a shot at 12:23, the minute that Kirk was shot. This story, if true, suggests that this guy shot a blank bullet just to make noise, to frame Robinson. If this story s true, then this man must have gone down the steps while avoiding the camera that showed the roof jump of a man not in tactical gear.

Caution: the man who claims to have seen the man with military clothes on roof emailed Candace to say that the rifle he saw was smaller, and thus could have had a smaller bullet. I caution because Turning Point needs a smaller bullet now that it has committed to a no-exit shot, and the same may be true for the FBI, it needs a smaller bullet too, meaning that Candace may have been played by someone who was part of the plotter's to begin with who job was to help frame Robinson by capturing him in the lie-down position.

This cameraman then emailed Candace to say he thinks the bullet was a smaller .223, which is much better for jibing with the no-exit theory. But it's impossible for this cameraman to know what kind of gun was up there, according to what we see on the camera shot. Besides, the FBI cannot use this version of the shooting because he's not on the roof according to the roof-jump video. I say that Candace is being played.

We should expect some response from the plotters to combat the rear-shot theory. And so there was another active-shooter story on Wednesday morning, which could be a staged event by the same plotters to get the military guys, with tattoos and podcasts, to focus on another story. Even the youtube channel, Charlie Kirk, is covering the other shooting (Dallas) on this Wednesday morning.

But right away, early Wednesday morning, a new camera shot miraculously came out showing "evidence" of a frontal shot, except that the evidence appears like a camera trick. The back-left shirt, at the collar, puffs up (balloons) inexplicably about two inches toward Charlie's backside, yet there's no explanation as to why the shirt should puff like this. It appears as though there's some air pressure under his shirt, same as the frontal camera view "FREEDOM" goes up about four inches, then back down to the normal position, TOTALLY INEXPLICABLE unless there's some air-pressure device under the shirt, or the plotters arranged it as "evidence" of a frontal rifle shot.

To no great surprise, the plotters, if from the Israelis or Turning Point, would have had their people all around Charlie, all taking video recordings, in case needed to maintain the frame job on Robinson. This explains the timing of the release of this Wednesday-morning video, to combat the Tuesday release of the bullet coming from the rear.

Jesse ON FIRE (who I don't trust), who's a dirtball, is the video owner who was either the first to release, or shared, the puff-up-collar image. This new camera view may have been owned / controlled by Turning Point because the Tuesday rear-entry story was making Turning Point appear complicit with the murder. Turning Point badly needs a frontal entry, otherwise its leaders are definitely shown complicit with the murder and/or its frame job. Therefore, the puffed shirt may be an add-on to the video. But even if not, a bullet entering the front and not coming out cannot make that puff. In fact, a bullet passing an inch or two from loose flour will not have enough energy to make flour dust-up in the air, let alone make a shirt balloon.

The supporters of the Robinson theory, because they love Turning Point as an authentic movement of Jesus, will now be egged to show the puff-up-collar camera view. They will reason that the Turning Point team wouldn't lie about the bullet found in the body. No coroner's report has been released probably because the GFBI is complicit in the Robinson frame job. Fox news won't ask Patel or Bongino whether there was an exiting of the bullet. Fox news is making lots of money on the Robinson frame job, but pushing it as the real McCoy.

Even some of those who reject Robinson as the shooter due to popular demand, and who know that, by popular demand, no one's buying the earpiece theory, are insisting that the liquid spatter is a necklace. This is so bizarre and impossible that we need to question whether the plotters are contacting popular video owners with a bribe to salvage the frontal-entry theory. It's now not a secret that money offers from Israelis / Jews to youtube owners is a thing, to alter their storylines.

Tim Poole, for example, is making mistakes on this topic, but he probably doesn't have enough time to make a proper assessment, which is why he shouldn't have offered one on Thursday. He thinks Robinson is the best option, and clears Turning Point of guilt concerning the no-exit claim. Tim is not given to getting out of the box in this case, and only he knows why. There's the reason that plotter's of staged events get away with it, due to people like Tim Poole unwilling to venture out of the TV box.

Tim is acting the PROFOUND JERK in this case, for while he sees something that looks like brain spatter flying out the back of Charlie's skull, at the very instant the bullet exits the neck, he still tells his audience, on Thursday, that a small bullet struck Charlie's neckbone, from a frontal shot, and therefore stayed in the body.

Plus, I kid you not, in case you missed it, there is a frame where the bullet can be seen stretching the skin at the neck, not yet fully out of the skin, during the exit from a to-the-rear shot. If there was any miracle in this shooting, that would be it, that the bullet can be seen IN ONE FRAME ONLY on its way OUT of the neck wound. Tim failed to show his audience that part.

Definition of "PROFOUND JERK": 1) Tim Poole who doesn't get out of the box enough to ask why Turning Point didn't show the bullet that the coroner found just under the skin; 2) Tim Poole not talking about the story changing from full bullet found to bullet fragmented in-body from striking mere neck bones. Again, the neck bone is not a hard rod, but easy-to-pass pieces of bone held together with tissue. Does Tim know this? Yes. Therefore, he has ulterior reasons for choosing the untrue theory for public presentation. The neck bone is at the very back of the neck (you can feel it with a finger), not in the center of it.

Last Week's Crow

In the last update, I told that, while I was on my lawn, the first-ever crow I heard this year passed directly over my head. This took place while writing last week's update on a crow in a dream that was deciphered as Kash Patel. Although I can make an heraldic connection between the two crows, the one of last week might not represent Kash.

The crow didn't caw until it was directly over my head, flying very low. I'm guessing 40 feet up. It never returned after flying over. It flew over my weed pile with cantaLOUPE plants growing due to my throwing cantaloupe scraps on it, with seeds, back in the spring. By the time of this event, I had mentioned the Loupe's (in last week's update) from a Loupe location in the write-up of Scottish Allisons, and Allisons were to topic due to Allison Bauer of Knob Hill FARMs where she and I worked when we were seeing each other over the course of about two months.

Bauers were the direct proto-Rothschilds, and Candace Owens FARMER, with black skin such as to be a good candidate for this crow, is suspicious about Israeli elements in Charlie's murder. Rothschilds founded Israel, and have plenty of money by which they can control the FBI. Knobs/Knobels probably share the Rothschild/Roddenstein arrow. Thus, my dating Alison at Knob Hill FARMs seems to do with Candace ("Candy") Owens FARMer, for Frame-like Farms list Farmers.

Plus, "CANTALoupe" can itself point to Candy Owens, and then Cantels are in Owens' colors and format while the Pasco's in the Cantel motto share the Owens Coat. See that? I told that in the last update, but I missed this: Cantels have a giant Pelican while Pellicans have the German Kirk Coat on a red Shield.

I think I also failed to mention that Cants, who have an "Aliis" motto term while the "Truth" motto term of Allisons is in the English-version motto of Alis'. The latter's two-word motto is in reverse from the Orphan motto. Plus, Charlie was shot in the throat, and Troats are listed with Truths. I should then repeat that the "sanGUINE" motto term of Cantels can be partly for the Guine variation of GUNs. Alis' share the muzzled bear of McCoys/CAWs/Mackays. A crow caws.

I told that, while kicking the crow away from the stove burner in the dream (of 2021), I woke up kicking a Mason jar in my bed, with my LEG. I told that Jarred-like Jarrets/Jarre's share the Coat of Gardens/Jardens who in turn have a "JUNGunter" motto term while Jungs/Youngs/JUNE's and Leggs almost have the Trump Coat. And then Jung-like Junks share the triple towers of Loupe's, in the colors of the giant tower of German Kirks. I was on my lawn when the crow flew over both me and the cantaloupe plants, and English Lawns are first known in Staffordshire with English June's.

Plus, as per CANTALoupes, Candel's/CantWELLs (Suffolk with Candys) share the annulets of German Gunters suspect in the "junGUNTUR" motto term above. German Wells/Wellers share a giant pelican (different colors) with Cantels, and it's in the colors and format of the Pellican Coat i.e. with almost the Kirk Coat. English Kirks are first known in Yorkshire with Candels (not "Candle") and Cantels. Weller-like Walerans share a "vos" motto term with Cantels. Wells/Wellers are first known in Westphalia with Valence-branch Velins (ducks) and Velens while the Kentwell estates in the Candle write-up went to William of Valence, making sense where English Valence's (Duck Coat in colors reversed) are first known in Kent.

Here's how I put it in the last update: "I was pulling weeds when the crow flew over me." However, as I didn't realize that the Pellicans in the Cantel Coat almost have the Kirk Coat, neither did I realize that I should take things to the Pullings/Pullys, who happen to have a pelican.

Plus, the last update stressed my pulling the hips and waist of Miss Peare that itself pointed to a staging of the murder of Charlie Kirk. If that's not enough, Pullings/Pullys share the motto of Patents/Pattens who share the lozengy Shield of Orems/Orrins, and Charlie was killed in Orem.

So, it seems that God sent that crow to you and I to tell us a story, and as it cawed, for the first time, while directly over my head, I found it interesting that Caws are listed with McCoys/Mackays, for Rob McCoy is the co-founder, with Charlie Kirk, of Turning Point USA. He's a Pentecostal pastor. McCoy might like to have a leading role in Turning Point, going forward. But, the question is, did God send that black birdie to tell us that McCoy is behind the murder? He has the motive if he wants to control what is now a wealthy and influential organization. Speculation only, same as any investigator would draw up.

The last update told that Frank Turek, standing near Charlie at the murder, and a part of the Turning Point team, points us to Turins/Tureks/VENTURA's because pastor Rob McCoy's church is in Ventura county (California). I assume that God would have gone out of His way to arrange that heraldry centuries ago. Plus, German Turks are first known in Silesia with KIRKners/Chirchners.

I assume that the Candle variation of Kentwells was as per a Cantel-line merger with Kents. The point is, Kents (Berkshire with Points) have a Coat like the one of Brocuffs, first known in Silesia. The Kent lion is shared with Chance's and Jarret-like Jarrats/Gerrards, and then the Sempers in the latter's motto are not only first known in Essex with Chance's and Brocuff-branch Brocks, but almost have the Coat of Kirkfields/Chirchfields, first known in Northamptonshire with Sphinx-like Spinks and Weeds. I was pulling weeds when the crow cawed above the weed pile (turned much to soil by now) with cantaloupe plants and half-grown cantaloupes. Brocuffs of Silesia alternate the giant Kent lion with the same-colored sphinx.

Weeds look related to the Coat of Irish McCoys/Cooeys. Scottish McCoys/Caws share the "dagger" with English Kirks (Yorkshire with Pullings/Pullys and Kays) and KIRKpatricks, and when I pulled Miss Peare by her HIPS toward me, we were on a deck (a stage) while German Decks are listed with Daggers. Hips' (Norfolk with Patricks) have another sphinx. Scottish Daggers are first known in Cumberland with WAISTells, and I was pulling her by her waist when pulling her hips. Hips' almost have the Phoenix/Fenwick Coat, and Charlie Kirk home is in Phoenix. The McCoy/Caw/MacKAY arm is "holding a dagger" while Holding-branch Holds/Holts share the squirrel with Decks/Daggers.

I didn't mention the McCoys/Cooeys in the last update. They share the double fesses of Stains who were a major topic in the last update as per Lorraine's grass stain, but I missed the following from the write-up of Scottish McCoys/Caws: " The badge of the clan is reed grass" (see bottom of page). Reds/Reeds are first known in Northumberland with Lorraine's and Phoenix's/Fenwicks.

Early this week, Candace Owens gave a warning to anyone on the Turning Point team who tries to usurp the company, who doesn't deserve it due to being disloyal to it and/or Charlie. She said she would expose that person(s) in all-out war. Was she speaking of Rob McCoy? She seems to be warming up to Erika Kirk as if, perhaps, Candace would like a leading role in the company going forward now that it's controlled by a woman (I think she should give the leading, ministerial role to a man).

There's also two POINTing fingers in the Crest of Boyds who share the checkered fesse of Scottish Caweys/Cauleys/Aulys and Morman-like English Moormans, Scottish Moormans/More's are first known in Ayrshire with Boyds. Charlie was killed in the Mormon state of Utah. Two fingers pointing are shared with Points and Babe's, the latter first known in Suffolk with English Moormans, and with the Buckle's in the Cawey/Cauley/Auly Coat. I can't say whether Cawleys were a McCoy/Caw branch, and then the English Caweys/Calleys/Callis' share the Keele/Kill quadrants. Coy-like Coweys/Covie's share the Turin boar heads, and both surnames are first known in same general area, and while Coweys/Covie's are in the colors and format of Ardens, the latter are first known in Lancashire with Cowes'/Coo's. Was the murder of Charley a coup?

Finding Scottish Turins with Coweys reminds that Rob McCoy operates at Ventura country while Ventura's are listed with Italian Turins/Tureks. Turin is in Piedmont, the latter where Masci's are first known who had Massey/Macey and Macey/Mace branches, where I trace king Maccus of MAN, and therefore the "Manu" motto term of McCoys/Caws/MACKAYS suggests a Macey branch.

Margys/Mackeys (Ayrshire with Boyds) use the "raven," a species of crow. That looks Arranged (by God) because "Mackey" is almost the Mackay variation of McCoys. The Stout-family vikings used a raven banner, and Stouts/Stows are first known in Cambridgeshire with Coys who in turn share the pheons of Cardine's (Cheshire with Maceys and English Kerricks). Coweys/Covie's are first known in KinCARDINEshire. Margys/Mackeys are first known in Ayrshire with Scottish Kerricks/Carricks, a branch of Crow-like Corrows/Carews. The Margy variation thus looks like it's from Margaret/Marjory Carrick.

The crow flew a line over the a piece of my DRIVEway some 20 feet from the cantaloupe plants. It then flew over me some 20 feet further from those plants. The Drive's share the Cawey/Callis / Kill quadrants, and Shoot-connectable Calls/Calles' (Wiltshire, beside Drive's) show nothing but trumpets. Drive's are first known in Hampshire with the Hone's/Hones' in the "honeste" motto term of Caweys/Callis. Off the Hampshire shore is the Isle of Wight, location of Cowes.

The bottom of the McCoy/Caw/Mackay page says: "War Cry: 'BRATach BHAN,' or WHITE BANNER." It must be part-code for The Mackay sept of Bane's/Beans, and part-code for Bratts/Breads (Cheshire with Masseys/Maceys and Maceys/Mace's) expected in the CAKE's/CakeBREADs (same place as Coys) because king Maccus' grandfather was Sitric CAECH. This means that Mackays are not descended from an MacAodh character, as some think. "Mackay" is just a Macey variation.

Bane's/Beans are first known in Aberdeenshire with Scottish Banners. I had claimed that Mackay elements were on the Isle of Wight, and Wights are listed with WHITE's.

The crow (could have been a raven) that flew overhead got suspect as Candace Owens snitching on someone(s) in Turning Point partnered with elite Rothschilds, or for the Israeli cause in contradistinction to Charley's criticism against Netanyahu's government, because the cantaloupe leaves were half rotted while Rothchilds (not "Rothschild" are listed with Rots. Rotens share the Reitman hexagram, and German Rots/Rothchilds have a giant raven.

Today, Wednesday, I noted that the mole tunnels just outside, and going up, the weed-pile dirt, has at least one mole because one small cantaloupe is being eaten by a small rodent.

On Wednesday night, less than an hour after writing the paragraph above, I learned that a Jewish donor to Turning Point, Robert SHILLman, ceased donating, but not before pressuring Charlie Kirk, with similar others in Netanyahu's circle, to cancel his Gaza sympathies. Shillman canceled his donations weeks before the murder. I therefore find it startling that English Shills have black rooster heads, the color of the Hann rooster. See Hanns in the quote below.

See "goose" in the last update to see why it points to Gaza, but note also that Mole's share the Goose/Googe boar, and both surnames are first known in the same place. Here's a snippet from the last update:

Gaza-like German Gas', first known near the first-known German Carlsons (giant, white griffin), are in the colors and format of the giant and white griffin of Letters, and the latter share the goose with Gas' (Hamburg, near first-known Trumps) who are in turn in the colors and format of giant-hand, German Geese's. Hands/Hanns can connect to German Hanns, a branch of Bibo-related Hahns, the latter in Trump and Kepke/Kopke colors and format and first known in Mecklenburg with Trumps. CUSHION-using Bibo's can be a pointer to Kushner's and Bibi Netanyahu's Gaza project(s). German Gas' together with French Gas' look connectable to Trumps.

Shills look a little related to Ardens, the latter first known in Lancashire with trumpet-using Levers. The latter have a gold rooster standing on a trumpet, and the Hann rooster would be gold in colors reversed. And, by the way, the crow on my stove was at a GAS burner, because I have a gas stove.

On Wednesday evening, the rear-entry theory made it to Valuetainmant, with 7 million subscribers. The plotters are wondering what to do, fast, because this is getting out. Triple the bots telling people that the splash is the wire of his earpiece, even though he wasn't wearing one. Don't tell them that part. Only a bot, a government stooge, or a too-proud-to-correct-himself peacock, thinks the splash looks like a wire.

By the time that the crow flew over the cantaLOUPEs, I had already mentioned Loops and Loupe's. I knew that Allisons were at Loupe, and that Loupe's share the Kirk tower. I knew that Allisons were first known in Lanarkshire with crow-using Kash's/Caseys, part of why the crow in the my dream pointed to Kash Patel. The Loops were added to the topic because they look related to the Bongino/Bongo Coat, and Dan Bongino is Kash's FBI deputy director. A day or two later, I saw that Turins/Tureks/Ventura's look related to the Bongino Coat too. Right now, the FBI is covering for Turning Point, betraying Charlie Kirk by doing so. Candace Owens reported Wednesday that the FBI has been pressuring Utah to cease its investigation into the murder.

The Bings, who come up as Bongs, Bengs and Bangs, have the Drive quadrants in colors reversed. The crow flew over the driveway, then over the CANTALoupes, and while Cantels are first known in Yorkshire with Banks (Benjamin colors), Candle's/KENTwells can jibe with Bings, first known in Kent. Benjamins share the annulet of Scayle's/Schools, and the latter share the Orem/Orrin lozengy. Orne's are first known in Hertfordshire with Scale's.

Gray Hughes is being overtaken by a tsunami, glug-glug-glug. But, no worries yet, the plotters still have the official autopsy report up their sleeve, and a few million dollars more could arrange for a false report. Gray Hughes will then consider himself the winner. But what if the leader of the autopsy decides to be honest, to reject the money offer? Now that would be a hard-as-steel man, and a miracle.

The Five won't touch this important story, but instead wastes the country's time with Kimmel, on Wednesday evening. Unwilling frauds, because Murdoch won't let them speak, even if they wanted to correct themselves after days of accusing Robinson, according to Murdoch's will. Murdocks share the Margy/Mackey raven probably owned by Rots/Rothchilds, for Mackays were at Moray, location of Rothes, the entity that named Rothschilds.

Between my driveway and the cantaloupe plants is a MAPLE tree about 35 feet tall. The crow flew over or beside that maple tree and then over the plants and my head. Maple's share the boar heads of proto-Rothschild Roets.

The Bullet

If you want a long run-down of the Robinson hoax that is sure to spoil the reputation of Kash Patel, with Bongino hanging onto his leg as he drags him along, this video reveals that Turning Point is lying, yet most everyone is attacking the government only:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-UtipJUu7c

The beauty is that Turning Point found opportunity to condemn itself when Candace and a Turning-Point man revealed no blood at the back of the head. It gave Turning Point the opportunity to commit to no exit wound, which it did JUST IN TIME to condemn itself, because it was only hours later when video owners started to show the bullet captured by two cameras, one showing it entering the side-back of the head, and the other showing an exit toward the stage floor (shown at 43rd minute above). Had Turning Point waited a few more hours to tell its version of the story, that the bullet was found in Charlie's body, it would not have committed to that no-exit story, and thus it would not have condemned itself. But I am so happy that it condemned itself, because where the stink is, nosy noses should go.

It's a shame that gun-lovers with tattoos are at the cutting edge of finding the truth while the FBI looks like a child by comparison. Kash is making a fool of himself. But, no worries, Fox news to the rescue.

On Thursday, Candace Owens got around to giving her opinion on RangeDayPro's rear-entry theory, and, shocker, Candace looks like a traitor to Charlie by claiming with no qualms at all that the brain splash is Charlie's neck chain. She says "debunked" with straight face, not leaving any doubt, which is how you can know she's lying for a cause, because people with brains can't explain how the neck chain can be flinging behind the head. Nor does the splash even remotely show links of a chain.

She moreover assaults the head-entry theory by pointing out that the reported gun flash is likely on a pane of glass, meaning, she says, that the gun could not have been there without breaking the window with the bullet. Yet her video has one scene where both the glass and the bush on a roof are showing, where we can see how rifle flash on that roof could have reflected on the dark glass to the camera that captured it. But she says nothing about that possibility, as if she wants her audience to all-out discredit the head-entry theory.

Anyone without a horse in the race can plainly see that the brain splash is not the necklace, and anyone claiming that it is a necklace has exactly zero way to explain how a bullet entering the throat above the collar could possible break the necklace or even move it.

From Thursday, we have another camera view showing the puffed shirt in much-more detail than we've had from a previous camera view. There is a question as to why the previous view removed many frames so that the picture was mainly removed. To see the puffed shirt right away, go to 10:00, and wait ten seconds, though the first part of the video has valuable information:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-HvvmgTgow

The tattooed speaker in the video above has maybe been listening to Candace Owens, for he repeats what she says, that the under-the-shirt explosion broke the necklace and sent it flying, to explain what RangeDayPro says is a brain splash. The problem is, I don't see the chain going in any direction. The problem is, the splash does not at all look like a long chain, but more like a puff of liquid. The problem is, the "explosion" under the shirt wasn't strong enough to put a hole in the shirt, let alone snap a metal chain. This tattooed character thus looks stupid.

The puffed shirt looks inexplicable, and is so strange that it once again points a suspicious finger at the Turning Point team for not mentioning it. Nobody's addressed it as far as I've seen videos, which is lots. I've seen this shirt puff on three or four videos, and am willing to tentatively say that it's an ad-on by the plotters (they own all cameras with puffs) in an effort to make it appear that the bullet struck a breast plate (the original story that Paramount Tactical tried to pass off that needed to be abandoned), in an effort to explain why the bullet didn't exit the body. In that picture, the plotters knew they needed to own the camera to the back of Charlie, because they knew the bullet was not coming from his front but didn't want it revealed.

If the bullet hit a breast plate, it should rip the shirt, but it was not ripped. Moreover, other camera views proved that Charlie sat down on the chair without a breast plate, especially the view showing the chain sticking out a little from under the shirt down to his heart region.

Mr. Tattoo doesn't point out where the chain is in this video. We don't see it, explaining why there's no pointer pointing to it. The shirt puffs up, and Charlie's face goes blurry, before the bullet exits the skin, which we can expect in a faked puff-job because the highest part of the puff hides the bullet coming OUT of the neck. Mr. Desperado thus looks stupid for not realizing this trick. The highest part of the puff even looks too weird to be reality, as if caused by a projectile going straight out from Charlie's breast.

The mic is still on Charlie's shirt after the puff job, and so Mr. Tattoo's talk about the mic possibly exploding doesn't work. I think he's subtly trying to blame Israel on that one. But, if I recall correctly, the early video of the puffed shirt, the one that left out many frames, made it appear as though his mic was gone off the shirt.

The man in all black, standing on the stage, puts his hand on his shoulder, at 10:43, without scratching it, then taps the shoulder, which is inexplicable unless it's a signal, for the bullet arrives a second or less later. The left shoulder his hand is on can be seen either in the scope of a shooter to his left, or by a nearby accomplice that then gives the shooter the green light to shoot.

That puff job is inexplicable by ordinary scenarios. Mr. Tattoo comes off as having eyes that can see through clothes, because he even knows that the "chain breaks in the front". How can he know this if he can't see it? Nor can he explain it. Both Tattoo and Candace came out with a no-doubt-about-it neck-chain story on the day after RangeDayPro put out his video. Why are the two of them bucking so hard against what definitely looks like a liquid splash? Why won't they leave even a little room for it being the reality? Maybe Mr. Tattoo is just stupid, but Candace has some ulterior / selfish motive, my guess.

Mr. Tattoo could be a gatekeeper for the plotters, feigning in many ways that he's part of the conspiracy theorists, willing to admit to all sort of problems in the TV-box narrative, but who's immediate task is to discredit the bullet from Charlie's right side, the most-important task as of mid-week.

On Thursday, with no time to loose, another camera shot (below) comes out that actually shows the necklace, and, wonder of wonders, RangeDayPro puts the video out and confesses, like a dumbo, that the brain splash was just the necklace. The plotters doctored yet another camera view that they owned, reserved in case needed to combat any truthers who found the truth. It's obvious, because this story comes out so soon after the reality was discovered. Plus, look at how ballooned the shirt is at the back, totally inexplicable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFOvS9cW1H8

It's possible that someone contacted RangeDayPro to threaten him, but judging by what he says in this video, it doesn't seem so. Instead, I'd suggest that he's not keen on declaring a doctored video because he doesn't want to get on the FBI's bad side, or sound too wild in a conspiracy theory. Besides, if he's not familiar with FBI tricks in conspiracy killings, he's apt to just believe what he sees in this video as authentic.

Any of you who have any wisdom at all will realize that a bullet entering the front neck cannot break the chain, let alone make it fling behind his head, unless the bullet exits the body and strikes the chain. This video with chain may have been created as the original story to "prove" a shot from Robinson, but when the whole world asked why there isn't blood spatter behind Charlie, the plotters decided to change the story to a non-exiting bullet...which them makes the video appearance of the chain inexplicable.

If one argues that the shirt puff explains the chain fling, what can explain the shirt puff? Therefore, be wise, know that this chain-including video is a fraud job. Listen to how RangeDayPro so freely says that the frontal shirt puff is from the chain breaking, so nonsensical. What broke the chain, bro? Making yourself look stupid before the anti-conspiracy blockheads is a badge of honor. Wear it.

I'm dumbfounded at how RangeDayPro knows that the FBI faked the elaborate Robinson details, yet portrays himself as not knowing enough that the necklace video can be faked in an hour or less. He's needlessly giving himself a lousy reputation after getting 6 million or more views on his original story. Somebody help this man out.

Pause at 10:37, where he shows something above the ear, which is a piece of the design on the tent wall. He says that it's the necklace, even though the bullet has not yet exited the neck at this time. But even if it has exited, it can't strike the necklace. Bro, please, pretty-please, the bullet came out of the neck too high to strike the necklace, why are you defaming yourself like this? At 10:50, you can see the semi-circles on the tent wall; that's what shows behind the ear where he thinks it's the necklace (see Valuetainment's Thursday show to prove it's a design on the tent). Earlier, RangeDayPro claimed that this piece of tent design was the blood spatter as it first came out (he spoke too soon). But when he showed the misty splash moving at some distance from the head...that in no way looks like a chain, and so it's disturbing me, as per his latest video above, that he doesn't revisit that moving splash to vindicate himself by telling that it cannot be from a chain.

At 12:13, gun-shot analysis puts the shooter at the small roof with bush, or possibly on the large, top roof you see, four stories above Charlie. What looked like a man was seen looking out from that top roof prior to the shooting.

Stew Peters thinks that Israel somehow got a device on or in Charlie's shirt that fires a projectile by air pressure, to explain the puffed shirt. But the mic is seen on the wrong side of Charlie's chest to shoot a projectile into where we see the wound. In order for Stew's theory to be correct, there had to be a device under the shirt on his other breast. He had to know about this device, and it needs to make sense, therefore, but it makes no sense if it's a second mic. I can't fathom Charlie agreeing to having any other kind of device under the shirt, and, besides, one can't see it sticking out of the shirt.

Even my theory makes little sense, where the plotters own the multiple camera shots with puffing shirt, doctored prior to public release. Why release the images at all if the puffing is needed to hide the bullet coming out of the throat? Perhaps release was deemed mandatory for one reason or another.

There are many people who know the Turning Point leaders enough to call to ask whether a coroner's report, or an autopsy, was officially recorded. Even Candace can do this, and though she admits to making calls to people to get to the bottom of things, she has not said that she's tried to get that information from TP, or that anyone there turned her down. If she's trying to keep on good terms with the new leadership, she thereby becomes compromised, unlikely to tell us that the leadership has turned down her requests to know what Erika, for example, knows of the body's inspection.

It is very suspicious that while the Internet is still buzzing on where the bullet came from, more this week than the previous, TP has not helped to clear up the contradictory reports it itself put out. Nobody's buying the ricochet off of the neck bone unless the bullet was from a weak pistol, or unless they choose to keep on good terms with Turning Point. The exit wound at the throat looks to me like a small .22 typical in pistols. A .22 in a rifle is called a .565 millimeter, and is packed with more gunpowder such that it's more than twice as long as a pistol's .22. Rifles shoot the .22 too.

One video owner tried to debunk his own side-entry theory by arguing that the shooter at the right could not control what effect the bullet could have. For example, he argues that a rifle could possibly create, against the shooter's will, such a massive wound from the side that it would compromise the frame job on Robinson. Ya-but, stupid, why are you not allowing for a shot planned into the hair by a small bullet that makes no vivid entry wound, then remove the camera from behind Charlie in case too much blood leaks out? Why is that Turkish man arguing that the bullet risked causing a large wound when he knows that a small bullet could be used? This argues for a small .22 from a pistol having a perfectly-adjusted laser light. That weapon could be fired from a sitting position, no scope needed. I shot a laser-light pistol, hitting a leaf 30-40 feet away no problem.

The man in the video below, though appreciated for his technical approach, has stunted thinking. Not a wonder, for he even admits that he's fired a half-million bullets over 40 years (12,500 annually), which makes him some kind of a nut. Aside from his 10-degree angle being too large (should be more like seven or eight), he does a good job with his geometry in the opening 20-25 minutes, showing that Robinson's bullet could not remain in the body or deflect down into the heart. He's shooting his own theory in the foot all that while.

At the 29th minute, he's comparing how a bullet bulges a skinless hunk of gel versus a human body with tight skin. It's not going to be the same bulging result with the skin containing a would-be bulge from pressurized body liquid. He shows only one frame of the shirt puff because what happens after that is a three-to-four inch puff of the shirt in the shape of a sharp cone directly below the bullet wound. This cone is so problematic for his puff theory that he makes himself appear deceptive by not showing it. You'll need to see it (use slow speed) in another video, for example the Thursday one above.

That cone is highly problematic because he thinks the skin and body parts under the skin are puffing to make the shirt puff. The skin can't be made to form a cone that large and sharp, and so I've got to reject his theory. The only alternative explanation I can see for the puffing is that the plotters had the video doctored to give the appearance that the body's doing what gel would do, the purpose of which is to puff the shirt upward so that it hides the bullet coming out of the neck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLiv8MAzw9s

Besides, how does the body water puffing the skin outward raise the "FREEDOM" four inches up on his body? If the body puffs starting at the neck and down into the chest, shouldn't "FREEDOM" go a little downward instead? Yes, and the video owner (Peak Prosperity) is quite the unreliable master of his theory for not pointing that out. The plotters wanted the shirt to go up because, I reckon, thy wanted to hide the out-flashing of the flesh as the bullet came OUT OF then neck.

Plus, water does not expand in volume. If water is puffing at the front chest, it's got to be displaced from the backside, yet we see the puffing also on his backside. It's completely unexpected that a bullet in the neck would create a massive vacuum (space) between the back and chest. Besides, the rib bones go all the way up to the brink of the collar bone, and will not permit the tissues in the chest to puff out. The body is not PURE water, but has water in the tissues. If the tissues can't get past the ribs, neither will the skin rise a couple of inches from its normal position.

Plus, the killer of this theory is that a bullet going through a neck, because it exist with most of its velocity, dumps only a small part of its total energy into the neck. In the gel block, the bullet's speed is mainly used up in the first foot of penetration. Big difference. The bullet dumps only as much energy as in the exploded gun powder of the bullet shell. If it whips through a neck without hitting solid bone, the bullet gives up a small fraction only, and so this explains why the video owner wants the bullet to have no exit, or his theory is dead. This video owner is talking too quickly and unreliably, and does not tell you that a 30-08 bullet penetrating a body does not unload all of its energy because it'll pass in and out.

We now see why the plotters doctored the video shots such that they show faked puffing, to send the message that the bullet did not penetrate the neck. Why was this necessary? They used someone to release the energy-based explanation of the puffed shirt, wherefore the first person to do so can be suspected as a deep-state / Israeli asset, though not necessarily.

It was necessary to combat anyone who proposed that the bullet entered from the side and exited the front, for they knew that the shot did so. It's that simple. Nobody explained the puffed shirt in the beginning because nobody had yet found evidence for a side entry, but no sooner did RangeDayPro come out with the evidence that the energy-based puffing story also came out. And that's why RangeDayPro should not be deceived. The plotters had to go with no-exit fakery because there was no visible blood spatter behind Charlie.

On Sunday, RangeDayPro agreed that the puffed shirt was due to bullet energy puffing the upper body. He says that the body puff broke the chain, meaning he still doesn't believe that the chain in another video was doctored into the picture to combat the brain splash. It doesn't matter how fast the puff happens. Even if it did happen, it shows the upper chest puffed about two inches. ANYBODY KNOWS, ANYBODY, that if you lift a neck chain two inches off the chest, it's not going to snap in half. Moreover, a puff of the ribs together with the flesh is not going send the chain flinging right off the neck at the back of the head. FACE IT, EVERYONE, these images were tampered with before release to the public. The neck chain is not a like a wound-up spring. Even if it breaks, there's no tension to send it flinging. If the neck expands, the chain's diameter is yet larger than the neck's diameter so that there should be no breaking, but even if it breaks, there's no cowboy in Charlie's shirt to lasso the chain clear off the neck.

RangeDayPro, a fellow Christian, is talking stupid. I don't know who he's collaborating with to make his conclusions. He doesn't yet know whether Charlie was shot by a rifle and a BIG BULLET, and already he's pushing the very puff-puff story that the plotters and the FBI are faking. RangeDayPro knows as much as anyone that the small exit wound he sees, with his own eyes, isn't from a BIG BULLET. It ain't, Pro, start adding up the facts properly. You're making a fool of yerself.

Beeline at about 38 minutes (video above) is probably a bot or an employee paid by the plotters; we can imagine Intelligence paying people to get its narrative out.

When the video owner shows the man in red pointing, it's not easily conclusive that he's pointing where the video owner thinks, especially as the video owner wants the shooting to be on a roof much closer to Charlie in order to make his silly case that a bullet entering at 20 degrees, rather than 10, will strike a rib bone such as to explain a no-exit bullet. He spends so much time telling how powerfully rifle bullets penetrate, even more than 14 inches of live softwood trunks, and after arguing that the little neck bones won't stop a rifle bullet from exiting the neck, he succumbs to a magical theory in which a mere snap-happy rib bone is what kept the bullet from exiting. That's STUPID.

At 5:38, he shows a view to the tent from the place on the roof where he thinks the shooter may have been. I've worked out the angle from a shot at that position by entering 100 feet into box b of this calculator, and 30 feet in box a for the height difference, to find the angle at 16.7 degrees (see alpha-a line), not the 20 he claims. I don't know how far that roof is; if the shooter was further than 100 feet, the angle is lower than 16.7. To find the angle of Robinson's position, enter 420 feet (140 yards) and 60 feet to find an angle of about eight degrees, or less if the height difference was less that 60 feet. There's a two-story difference in height between Robinson's spot and the one the video owner is proposing.

The video owner has the problem of believing the coroner, even though we don't know where his allegiance lies in a crime where the government is showing complicity with the real shooter's boss. Why is it beyond the video's owner's ability to conjecture that the coroner is lying the lie he was forced or urged to lie?

Watching his video was not a waste of time, and we should appreciate the near-end where he shows the lack of a shadow under Robinson running on the white part of the roof. He agrees that it tends to prove that Robinson was doctored into that scene, but then why won't he consider that the puff job may also be a doctored scene? Robinson's roof jump looks authentic to me, suggesting that the short jog without shadow was problematic to the plotters (maybe reveals no rifle) such that they opted to replace it with something non-problematic.

I think the video owner does a great disservice to Charlie by giving no credibility to the side-entry-and-exit theory, by not showing the entire puffing and addressing how it's problematic to his theory, and by showing trust in a report supposedly from a coroner. That report serves to discredit the Robinson narrative, but appears intended to confirm it. That is, the bullet was supposedly found in the body such that it discredits both a shot from the Mauser and a side-entry theory, and the surgeon conspired with the coroner when implying that the 30-06 bullet struck a neck bone so as to remain in the body. It's clearly an alliance of people seeking to frame Robinson, a horrible government crime on top of the murder. Pro-Trumpers, and especially Erika and the rest of the Turning-Point team, should be screaming at these crimes.

There's only been about four video shots of the killing, even though there were many-more cameras recording it. One video owner said there were reports of people's videos disappearing from their cell phones. Sure, why not? Why can't Intelligence go into your computer / phone and delete / alter things?

According to a Tim Poole show, a leaked report from Crowder (how does that happen?) says that the FBI has secretly canceled its claim that the Mauser was the weapon used. I'm going to hold out hope that Kash and Bongino have realized that they've been played by the plotters, who planted the rifle and staged Robinson's role, but in order for the duo to be respected ever again, they had best come clean by going after the Intelligence pawns who set up the murder. If they're afraid to do that, then step aside and let braver people lead the charge.

On Friday, Candace Owens claims that she has inside information that Robinson was not at the university on the day of the shooting. She said she'd elaborate on Monday (29th). Some might be thinking that the FBI is now going to now claim a new shooter as the man in tactical gear, the one Owens talked about who was at the same roof spot as where Robinson was placed by the stagers. If this other shooter was on that roof, the same camera that reportedly caught Robinson would have recorded him, but the FBI can't now show us the man in tactical gear at the same spot as Robinson because Kash then looks complicit with framing Robinson.

George Webb goes up to near the bush to show that a shot from a roof two stories above Charlie could have been from 10 feet behind him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6IX6HTgLHo

Christians in Politics

I agree with Charlie Kirk's fight against wokism and the vaccine goons, but I, if in his position, don't think I'd mix that fight with flag and nation, for the nation is not for Jesus. I would have sense enough to know that America, and even most of MAGA, will never honor Jesus, and that MAGA is filled with pro-Trumpers who'll caress Christians so long as, and only if, they vote for Trump. Charlie tried to enlist vaticanites into his fight against wokism, which inevitable is a fight against the Democrat party. To help expose vaticanites as hypocrites, most of them had been Democrat long after that party embraced proto-wokism. SIN, that is.

Kirk loved Billy Graham, but an ecumenical approach is the very danger of mixing Jesus with politics. It should not be an option. What good is making the majority of the country anti-woke with every-and-any Christian stripe willing to enlist with his program if those stripes intend on usurping the power structures once success is obtained? What good is using non-Christian MAGA to win political power if it demands to have the country go its Spiritually-naked / Masonic way?

Rather, he should have stayed to his Christian message amongst the youth, and to his anti-woke / anti-sin message amongst the youth, without the attempt to enlist political factions. It does a lot of good, to fight wokism, if only it gets plastered to the dirt with Biblical reason. The latter pries some people away from Democrat "reasoning," which is not reasoning at all, but rather is gross political tooling that holds to no principles but anti-Christianity. Charlie's principled approach is probably what the youth liked who still had some moral backbone from their parents, still not fully stripped of it by the school teachers.

In my opinion, it's certain American Jews who birthed and nurtured anti-Christianity of a gross and violent kind. They would have hated Charlie more than anyone else. Traditionally, about 80-percent of Jews voted Democrat, though some boarded with Trump due partially to his pro-Israel stance in distinction to Obama's position. Still, 70 percent of Jews voted for the sin party, and the pedophile, Joe Biden. These people are a very pathetic lot. But 30 percent did not vote for the sin party.

On top of ecumenicalism sharing commonality with freemasonry, Charlie added his name to Trumpism, which I think is disgusting in the eyes of God precisely because Trump has given lip service to Jesus for votes. It's of course possible to share Biblical wisdom and hope without Trumpism, but it'll never get as popular. If evangelists are holding hands with Trump in efforts to make Christianity more relevant to MAGAites, isn't that the wrong way to go about it? One could present the theory, not dogmatically, that God would have saved Charlie from the bullet had he not shared his table for Jesus with horned creatures. For his sake, I hope that's not true. I hope that he's under the Grace that comes from the great and awesome Sacrifice of Jesus, which covers for our mistakes.

By "awesome," I don't mean "big." By this Act, God was, not demanding, but begging mankind to love Him. If "begging" is not the right word because it can have a negative connotation, then "extremely desiring." To put it another way, though our sins, our flagrant trespasses, were "killing" God, they could not kill the love He protected and reserved for us if we would only correct ourselves, to invite Him into our lives, to view Him rightly as THE GREAT ONE, and not mock Him as do the anti-Christs, not ignore Him as did the historical pagans who preferred cardboard-cutout / cartoon characters instead for their gods.

To the other extreme from political activism of Christians are pastors who seem to have sympathies with liberal culture to the point that they don't concern themselves with porn and the rest of the sinful tide brought on by activist leftists. I applaud Christian activism against that tide, but it doesn't need to join political movements that have no real Christian concerns. Joining such movements will destroy the Christianity in Christian activism.

"Activism" means mainly to speak out. So, speak out. Tell how disgusting the leftist and atheists are, how twisted and Hell-bound, how despised they are by God. Don't caress them with your words, because that doesn't send them the proper warning. They are the walking dead, destroyers of souls, deceivers, hateful of Jesus, mockers of righteousness. It should make one angry when thinking about them, or hearing them spout twisted "realities," but we need not to let that anger become our personalities because that's what they want for us that they might label us as "hateful." They provoke us to anger, then accuse us for becoming angry. So, be snappy when in their faces, or blast them back according to their provocations. It might even snap them out of their sick states.

Why should Turning Point become a mega-million-dollar organization just because Charlie visits a few dozen colleges annually? Wouldn't it have been more glorious for Charlie if he just covered his costs? How little does it cost to fly to a U.S. city/town plus a night's motel? If a man's zeal, boldness and confidence comes from millions of dollars in a bank account, how is that glorious to God? It must have been quite the cushy job when doing only a dozen annually in the beginning, but if the money egged him on to doing 50 annually, because the money was in making those visits, then the ministry seems compromised.

The rationale is that it costs money to evangelize, but evangelical operations never stop taking money once it starts rolling in. Same goes for news-based video owners. They argue that they need to make a living if they apply themselves full time, but what they would really like is a half-million annually. These people, and evangelical operations, have every ability to just refuse further donations. Show me just one ministry or church that does this. Youtube channels making millions never have enough.

Dan Bongino was like that, never missing an opportunity to perform the slated number of ads on his one-hour show. How much money does a man deserve for a one-hour show five days per week? Now that he's in a position to clean up America as he promised his donors, he might be standing with Kash Patel while the latter does the devil's bidding in the Kirk crime. What kind of a clean-up job is that? How long should Bongino wait before making a public announcement to say that Robinson didn't kill Charlie, even if Kash doesn't want that statement made? The pressure is on.

There has got to be such a thing as a righteous politician. I don't see anything wrong with employing oneself as a righteous politician. But can a Christian handle the pressure, or the political loss to oneself, when doing right in the midst of snakes?

The Texas shooting this week allows Patel to change emphasis away from his guilt in the Kirk crime. We shouldn't be misled into thinking that Patel is not guilty of lying and framing Robinson as if maybe he hadn't yet seen the rear-entry videos last we heard from him. He's guilty because he of all people, and his people on the case, know there's two bullet holes in Charley. Patel's team has known from the very start, from day one, that the bullet entered the back of the head. The team was obviously going to keep that hush. Now the whole team has been caught along with Turning Point, begging whether someone in Turning Point helped to coordinate the murder. How's that for explaining how Christians can get into terrible trouble with God when becoming political?

Christians have done plenty over the past two decades to rightfully portray leftist as people who should be shunned, as brute beasts who have no principles, as demonoids that should be despised. But there will be a backlash precisely because they are wicked while never learning how pitiful they are. It's to no surprise that they project their own selves back on us, and when they get power back, they will persecute us with the power of their police forces and courts, even with their thugs on the streets. How do we prepare for it?

Did Charlie stress the end times, the 666, or was he a "Kingdom Now" advocate? I don't know. Kingdom Now is the belief that the Church must win the world BEFORE Jesus returns, to pave the way for His return.

The reason that Christians should not exercise pride of country -- patriotism -- is that the nations do not belong to Jesus, not one of them, and especially not the fabulously wealthy Unites States. It gets gross when people like Bongino say, "God, I love this country," and he's got untold tens of millions of dollars stuffed in multiple money-making schemes. Where did that money come from? From the folks who want to see sin done away with in their country, and good Christians consider fabulous wealth sinful, because the fabulously wealthy are required by God to give most of their money away.

The reason that pride of country is NOT anything God would esteem is that country is made of people, and because Jesus knows what's in a man, not good. What is Bongino proud of? What are American patriots proud of, the fabulous wealth and the fabulous military? What twisted Christian would esteem America for these things? Typical patriots we see in videos are not leadership material for the Kingdom of God. Make a colossal distinction between America and the government of Jesus. Christians can work to better their country, and of course we should, but shake off the patriotism, the pride, because God is not proud of the people. Instead, God is aghast when he looks upon humanity. He seeks the few choice grapes for his wine, and these include those who shun the lusts of the world, whose choices are not based on maintaining more honor than they deserve.

Bongino portrayed himself as honorable, morally principled, but look at how dismal his record is becoming as he finds himself with the choice of obeying or disobeying Kash, the traitor of those he had supported with the words of his mouth. He climbed the political ladder with his mouth, then spat out those who empowered him when he got to the near top. But is it really at the top to lead the FBI? Isn't that rather the lowest position today? Yes, it's as low as the head of a snake.

If Christians hang off of the corner of the national flag in order to become more relevant, as Charlie did, isn't that like having a second god? What would the true God think of us when having a second god so long as it's second priority? "God first, country second," looks like a lightning rod if nation is a second god. It's unbecoming for Christians to elevate men to honor whom God would strike dead if not for his Grace. Everywhere you look in politics, political allies are honored and flattered with words. Trump does this to Christians, but only as long as they are his political allies. Disagree with the main political program, and you will be slapped out of the circle, ask Thomas Massie about that.

Be a salt, yes, if that means to correct the dismal reasoning of Godless humanity, but you can do it without the flag tied around your neck as your scarf.

Or, what business do Christians have in Ukrainian pride? Since when is Ukraine special to God? Since when do Ukrainians hold Ukraine in honor after they become Christians? I freely despise my country because it is evil. It has been evil my whole life long, ever growing into a fatter parasite at the government level, and continually dimmer on the cultural level. How will I justify my pride in canada before God. Shudder, I'm not going to give up my friendship with God by become a friend of a Godless nation. Pierre Poilievre is a Godless man. He thinks he's too intelligent to believe in a God. He probably thinks that carrying the water of God isn't good for his chances of becoming the prime minister.

I desire to be persecuted with words for my stand against the Godless social engineers of any country. I desire to show God my loyalty to Him alone. There is the True Glory, not in the rocket's red flare, but in a happy God. Despise me, people of this world, cancel my voice, but then you'll have nothing to argue in your defense when God closes your mouth, and treats you harshly, as you deserve. I'd rather be on the painful end of the stick than on the guilty end.

Did the apostles train choice and honorable Christian men to enter Roman politics, to infiltrate the Roman senate in order the Christianize the empire? Therein we have need of asking whether God would Himself set up Christian machinery to work that product in any modern country. The closer we are to the Return, the less likely that God will seek to Christianize America from a political handle. I can see God setting up some Christians in politics for choice reasons, but I don't know whether Charlie's nationalism movement is from God. Quite possibly not. Sure, go to colleges and correct wokism, but there's no need to wrap the flag around yourself while doing so, especially if it's to garner the support of Godless patriots / Conservatives. The movement has two ambitions, to spread Biblical values, and to get votes for non-Christian politicians in order to fight against the globalist-attuned evils of the Democrat party. My qualm is: does God favor or condone this approach?

I'm happy with the result of Christian nationalism if the politicians keep loyalty to Christian principles and concerns. But will they? At what cost to their own souls and Heavenly rewards do Christian politicians win that situation which may or may not return "dividends," or the "spoils of war"? In his first term, Trump promised Christians that they would have school choice with tax dollars. Has he yet delivered? How better could he Which scenario might God deem best for us, to sit in a tub filled with Republican dollar bills, or in a tub of frigid waters poured by the Democrat party? Does the comfort in a better economy do Christians better than the discomforts and pains from Democrat insolence?

It is necessary for anti-Christs to have power in order that we may inherit the world. By giving the devil power, he and his supporters condemn themselves, and will be Judged unworthy to rule the planet. Even the survivors of Armageddon will feel that way, once the full exposure by God has ended.

There's a question as to whether Charlie was killed for his political position(s) versus his Christian message. How much of the money that came in to Turning Point was for political causes versus Christian causes? Would God condone that situation? Did Turning Point welcome political dollars? Would God be pleased with Christians giving money to get non-Christian, pro-Trump Republicans elected? Or would God view that as theft from His people?

The best that Christians can do is help some other Republican faction rule the country and the military. For the sharing of the country's policies, it's better that the national ruler is supported by Christians if it makes him keep some loyalty to them in the forthcoming policies. But for the sake of shaping the Church, a Christian alliance with the empire is the wicked vatican, for example. If the only thing you know about the vatican is what popes, clergy and news media say, you know nothing.

We then have an additional problem where money for Christian nationalism comes partly from Christian Zionists, and maybe even prosperity gospelites such as Hillsong. Christian Zionists, I think, are predominantly pre-tribulationists espousing "grace alone" in contradistinction to vatican works. However, "grace alone" is not a part of the gospel because only the obedient get to have the grace. Jesus said so, take it up with Him if you don't agree. We are saved by grace who turn from sins and thus become obedient. If we turn from sins for a season only, to commit greater sins in a later season, that doesn't look like a recipe for salvation. If we turn from sins to promote the pre-tribulation rapture that twists Jesus, Daniel and Paul, that doesn't bode well for the reputation of Christianity.

To speak against the atheists, one may now take advantage of the political sphere because, by and large, leftist parties are anti-Christ. Therefore, certainly, take the golden opportunity to pound atheism by pounding leftists. Do become political, not by taking up the flag, but by using the opportunities afforded by leftists swine, snakes and scorpions. They are giving us an open door. We started winning ever since they opened the door by revealing themselves as counter-Bible slimes. We helped to show the world that they suck money and power as their chief god. We've helped the political right by helping to show that the chief sacrifice of leftists is deception on an altar of smoke and mirrors. EMPTY SUITS, just like satan. They want to kill us because they can't defeat us with words. The right we speak rightfully portrays them as destitute and wretched. Is it good to hammer leftists with political power? Yes, because it weakens their power to destroy Biblical culture by force of government institution. But don't let political involvement change your priorities. Don't marry Jesus with the flag. Don't even put it into His hand. He'll drop it, leave it behind. We do likewise. Our only flag is Jesus.

Beware the youtube channel, Culture, Faith, and Politics, for although he can appear Biblical, he says that Moses is not an historical person. Also, leftists are trying to capitalize on combating Christian nationalism for the wrong and political reason.

Teaching the Word should have the undivided purpose of building the kingdom of God, not to be mixed with building Washington powers. If you wish to work full time as a politician, keeping to the principles of God, wonderful. It's not a job anymore unworthy than other ordinary jobs. And if you talk about Jesus, or advance Biblical values, while working as a politician, all the better. In that case, why was Charlie doing wrong by having a political organization, Turning Point, while adding Jesus to the program? Only God knows for sure how wrong or not wrong it is, depending on the details of the operation.

A Christian politician is foremost a citizen of God's Israel, and if Charlie was ashamed or afraid to say this to Netanyahu's face, that seems a disappointment for Jesus. "Mr. Netanyahu, I belong to the true Israel of king Jesus, and your Israel is under a Curse until the Appointed Time of salvation." Suddenly, Turning Point would get no money from Israel if it spread that message, which, I think, would be glorious to Jesus, because this is God's main concern going into the end times, Jews versus Christians. Jesus said that Israelis will be under a curse until they say, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of YHWH."

But if Charlie takes money from Israeli elements in the United States with a secret promise to uphold Israel's wars, he enters a twilight zone where God's disappointment might turn to wrath. By taking that money while also catering to Rothschilian creatures in Washington, too afraid even to offend Christian Zionists for fear of badly cutting to size the political movement that is Turning Point, one can see why God might more than frown. If instead of building the United States into a more moral nation, as Turning Points claims to do, it also supports Rothschilian creatures, then Charlie did right to correct himself by snubbing Netanyahu and his goons. Maybe too little too late.

The video below has some evidence that Charlie's parents are fakes, but it's evidence also for an alternative theory. You decide:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VJCEIZE46k

In the 4th minute of this video, Erika says, prior to Charlie's death, that she met Charlie in an Israeli airport while she was with her mother. What were she and her mother really doing in Israel? The rest of the video above isn't worth watching, after the Erika piece.

NEWS

This video says that all AI takes "knowledge" from iron-fisted Wikipedia, and that Wikipedia is a leftist control-pig seeking to social engineer the world going forward:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFrfxjb_Iw0

Tylenol in a pregnant woman can ruin the baby's mind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feRa5rrwop4

FOUR HUNDRED OSTRICHES SAVED, temporarily, at the last minute:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_6YRAjFww8

The story above is bigger than it looks because canada's liberal government is a WEF dragon that would like to destroy entire cow herds for the WEF program.

Thomas Massie probably shouldn't have revealed that he has enough signatures to force Pam Bondi to release certain Epstein files without much redaction. The Republicans can now work to remove some of his votes with crook or hook. It's possible that the FBI's corruption with Kirk's killer has caused some Republicans to abandon Trump's side on this Epstein issue.

Here's a video with a pastor telling of the cost to Christians involved in Trumpism or "Christian nationalism":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7et0T6Ql-ag

This video demands that Pam Bondi arrest Chris Wray:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPR6pYl80_U

If you thought that dictatorial digital ID was a long ways off as yet, the fist has exposed itself in Britain; the people get no choice:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMme7KNKILM

Trump looks like he's been stringing his base along, deceiving it, making it think he's an anti-war president, but, seeing opportunity to defeat a weakened Russia, he's maybe after the glory of attempting it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8XzASrxTa8

The most-dangerous citizen says, "I'm not a conspiracy theorist." These idiots pride themselves in trusting government even where conspiracy theorists work hard and successfully to reveal the globalist realities in Western governments. In canada, more than half the citizens are blind to the fact the WEF globalism is in the highest political levels for the purpose of destroying the power of the people, which involves crippling the nation via conspiratorial, destructive "policies." Much of the problem in canada is that the state media almost never speak clearly, but in foggy statements that, for most people, hide what's really going on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrMEHcicmI4

youtube canada is now giving me a regular enforcement of half-leftist videos even though I do my best not to click on them. This pattern has been SLOWLY getting worse, by design, with the obvious goal of making youtube as badly leftist as television became 20 years ago.

---

NEXT UPDATE

Here's all four Gospels wrapped into one story.

For Some Prophetic Proof for Jesus as the Predicted Son of God.
Also, you might like this related video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3EjmxJYHvM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efl7EpwmYUs

Pre-Tribulation Preparation for a Post-Tribulation Rapture

---