Mike Stone - Why Tyler Robinson Did NOT Kill Charlie Kirk
September 16, 2025
Left, Portrait of a Patsy
Charlie Kirk was murdered by a member of his staff.
Mike Stone gives nine reasons the prevailing narrative is bogus.
(henrymakow.com)
1) The official story from law enforcement is Tyler Robinson had a friend drop off a rifle, which he picked up at an undisclosed location. (Still no word on how he snuck that rifle up to the roof where it's claimed he fired the shot.) The rifle is an old, bolt-action model, like the one Lee Harvey Oswald supposedly had - but it's not his rifle, he's never practiced with it, he's never even fired it.
On top of that, his grandmother, Debbie Robinson, said Tyler has never touched a gun and "couldn't be that good of a shot." https://www.distractify.com/p/tyler-robinson-grandma
Yet despite all that - despite handling a rifle he's never touched or fired, despite no military training, despite his own grandmother saying Tyler has never touched a gun, and despite any nervousness he must have felt, Tyler managed a kill shot from 200 yards away, the length of two football fields, on his very first try.
This is the most damning evidence of all. Tyler likely never fired a gun in his life. It is simply inconceivable for him to have made that shot with a rifle he had never used from such a long distance without knowing how to adjust the scope, calculate for distance and wind, etc. on his first try.
Verdict: Impossible
2) The official story from law enforcment is Tyler fired the kill shot from a roof 200 yards away, climbed down and stashed the rifle in the woods, where it was found. However, there is no video of him holding the rifle while climbing down from the roof. The official story is he disassembled the weapon before climbing down, which is why it can't be seen on video, then reassembled the weapon before stashing it in the woods.
But that makes absolutely no sense. If he just murdered someone and is running for his life, why would he first disassemble the weapon, and why, if he did disassemble the weapon, would he then reassemble it before stashing it in the woods?
Verdict: Highly Improbable
3) Despite fleeing an area with thousands of people and a heavy law enforcement presence, Tyler managed to escape while carrying a rifle. And then after he escaped, he continued to evade capture, despite the most massive manhunt in the state's history. If he had not turned himself in, he'd still be free.
Verdict: Highly Improbable
4) The official story from law enforcement is Tyler left behind so-called "tranny cartridges," which makes absolutely no sense. First, why would he leave cartridges behind? Second, why does this resemble so many instances of planted evidence that we've seen in the past, such as the pristine passport found in the rubble of the Twin Towers, the copy of the Koran found in a nearby car, the manifestos left behind by alledged lone nut shooters, the rifle found in the school book depository, etc.?
Verdict: Highly Improbable
5) The official story from law enforcement is Tyler has confessed to the killing. However, he has not confessed. Why would they lie and claim he did if not to plant guilt in the public mind?
Verdict: Highly Improbable
6) The official story from law enforcement is the kill shot came from in front of Charlie. However, in the same way that John F. Kennedy's head moved back and to the left after he was shot from the grassy knoll, and not from the school book depository behind him, Charlie Kirk's head moved sideways to his left, which is consistent with the kill shot coming from his right and slightly behind him. The wound which opened a stream a blood from his neck looks more like an exit wound, not an entry wound.
Verdict: Highly Improbable
7) The official story from law enforcement is that Tyler committed the murder because he's a tranny and Charlie Kirk was against trannies. However, Charlie Kirk said the GOP should welcome trannies and even posed with trannies. Tyler's alledged motivation makes zero sense.
Verdict: Highly Improbable
8) The official story from law enforcement is Tyler acted alone. If that is true, why were there professional decoys in the audience whose job it was to create a distraction? https://www.ksl.com/article/51373320/man-claimed-to-shoot-charlie-kirk-to-draw-attention-from-the-real-shooter-police-say
Are we to believe that 71-year-old George Zinn, who was also used as a decoy on 9/11, is in cahoots with 22-year-old lone tranny Tyler?
Verdict: Highly Improbable
9) The official story from law enforcement is Tyler acted alone and has confessed to the killing (which he hasn't). If that was the case, prosecutors would want the crime scene kept in pristine condition in order to help convict him.
However, the crime scene was scrubbed clean immediately after the killing, with no police tape, no forensic personnel, no nothing. https://x.com/i/web/status/1967001769151500675
Verdict: Impossible
Tally up these nine reasons and it becomes clear that Tyler Robinson did not kill Charlie Kirk. He's merely another in a sad list of patsies, no different than Lee Harvey Oswals, Sirhan Sirhan, and others.
---------------------------
Mike Stone is the author of the new book How to Meet and Attract Girls . . . and Why You Shouldn't and Teen Boy's Success Book: the Ultimate Self-Help Book for Boys; Everything You Need to Know to Become a Man https://amzn.to/3Je7fng
EJ said (September 17, 2025):
Com’ on Mike, when have they lied before? Oh yeah…
Pulse Night Club, Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon, Denver Theater, Columbine, 9/11, JFK, RFK, MLK, Viet Nam (The Gulf of Tonkin), Climate Change, Chemtrails, Cigarettes, High Cholesterol bad-Statins good, Thalidomide, COVID, Osama Bin Laden (Tim Osman-CIA code name), Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction, Pearl Harbor, Afghanistan, Mexico had invaded us, Spain sunk the USS Maine, Hiroshima was “an important military base” to bomb, The Pentagon Papers, Reagan’s “weapons for hostages” denial and on and on.