Is FBI Director Running Cover for Foreign Assassin?

Kash Patel nixes inquiry into "foreign ties" to Charlie Kirk killing

Kevin Barrett • November 22, 2025

 •

Charlie Kirk was killed on the eve of this year’s 9/11 anniversary, kindling a media firestorm. According to the official narrative, Kirk was shot by a lone gunman named Tyler Robinson. Even before the suspect was identified, the media was already reporting that the crime was linked to transgender radicalism, though there was no way anyone could have known that at the time.

We are told that a single shot felled Kirk, killing him instantly and leaving no exit wound. But ballistics experts say that a .30-06 fired into a human neck from around 150 yards would most certainly exit. A spokesman for Kirk’s organization TPUSA, Andrew Kolvet, quoted a surgeon who worked on Kirk’s body as saying that “the bullet should have absolutely gone through” but that it was stopped by “a miracle” because Kirk was “a man of steel.”

A more plausible account has been offered by Chris Martenson, a Ph.D. neurotoxicologist and former vice president of the Fortune 500 company SAIC. In his YouTube video “Analysis Solves Kirk Case—Evidence Points Away From Robinson’s Position” Martenson convincingly shows that the official story is impossible and Tyler Robinson is an innocent patsy. According to Martenson’s detailed analysis, the shot that killed Kirk must have come from a higher and wider angle, allowing it to plunge downward through Kirk’s neck into his chest, from whence it could plausibly fail to exit. Such a one-shot kill would be a hallmark of a professional assassin.

Other evidence supports Martenson’s conclusion that Robinson is innocent. Videos show the man purported to be Robinson leaving the rooftop from which the bullet could not have been fired. Strikingly, the suspect is not carrying a gun. The official story that Robinson broke down the gun, a time-consuming procedure requiring tools, in order to stuff the parts in his pants before leaping off the roof, seems absurd.

If Robinson was a patsy, and the authorities are covering for the perpetrators, the Charlie Kirk assassination must have been orchestrated by powerful, connected people—perhaps even an intelligence agency cleared to operate in the US under cover of “national security.” Indeed, immediately after the shooting, suspicions were turning toward the “assassination nation”: Israel. Ron Unz reports that a few hours after he heard of the shooting, “someone well situated in conservative circles who personally knew Kirk…unequivocally told me that everyone in Kirk’s circle, even including important Trump Administration officials, suspected that Israel had probably killed the young conservative leader.” According to Max Blumenthal, Kirk had been turning down lavish funding offers from pro-Israel sources, including one from Netanyahu himself, while refusing Zionist orders to distance himself from friends like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, who have been harshly criticizing Israel’s genocide of Palestine and its domination of the United States.

Unz speculates that Israel might have been moved to kill Kirk to pre-empt his looming endorsement of Tucker Carlson’s five-part series “The 9/11 Files.” Kirk’s assassination on September 10 forced Carlson to cancel his appearance at the September 11 “Turning the Tide: 9/11 Justice” conference in Washington DC—and, more importantly, prevented Kirk from using his considerable influence to promote his friend Carlson’s efforts to re-open the 9/11 case. (The best-informed scholars of 9/11 agree that an honest investigation would identify Israel as the main perpetrator, which would likely trigger that small nation’s rapid demise.)

Did Trump Administration officials immediately assume Israel “publicly executed” Kirk, as Unz was told? And if so, might some have wanted to push back? That’s the implication of mainstream media reports detailing a Kirk-assassination-centered feud between FBI Director Kash Patel and National Counterterrorism Center chief Joe Kent. Pro-Kent sources say their boss gained access to FBI files on the Kirk killing in hopes of “chasing down any leads to ensure no foreign groups were involved in Kirk’s death.” When Patel learned what Kent was up to he apparently went ballistic, calling a special White House meeting to shut down Kent’s investigation. Reading between the lines, it seems Patel was doing what so many FBI higher-ups have done in cases ranging from the Kennedy assassinations to 9/11: committing treason by running cover for Israel. (Patel notoriously testified to Congress that Jeffrey Epstein had no clients, but only trafficked sex slaves to himself.) Kent, for his part, is a reputed anti-neocon.

By allowing Israel to commit genocide while blackmailing and assassinating American leaders, Trump’s MAGA movement has doomed itself. From its ashes, an America First movement is arising. That movement’s top priority is to end America’s enslavement to Israel. If people like Thomas Massie, Candace Owens, Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, and Marjorie Taylor Greene prevail—perhaps helped by insiders like Joe Kent—the truth about Charlie Kirk’s assassination could become a turning point in our history.

(Republished from American Free Press by permission of author or representative)

https://www.unz.com/kbarrett/is-fbi-director-running-cover-for-foreign-assassin/