Too many coinkidinks | Charlie Kirk Search Data Leak Could Change EVERYTHING We Know About His Assassination | Redacted
(www.youtube.com)
💊 RED PILL 💊
Comments (16)
sorted by:
Ok. Up front disclaimer 1: I'm a alt-media skeptic. Yes, I'm a Qtard and yes, I subscribe to core conclusions from the Q drops, etc. But over the years, I've run into enough fake info, misinfo, disinfo and clickbait content that targets the 'awakened' community, the truthers, the people looking outside the normie Matrix, to know that its a real mix out there, and there are certainly control opposition and intel psyops that target us.
Seeing all sorts of big and small operations to hijack the Q operation during the years 2018-2020 is what has primed me in this perspective.
Up front disclaimer 2: I don't have any hard and fast conclusions re: the Charlie Kirk assassination. I have incoming data that contradicts other incoming data, and from a practical viewpoint, I'm not convinced there is much value to be gleaned from 'debunking' the official narrative, the alt-narratives, and the anti-narratives.
So, I'm not here to assert that the official narrative is legit OR to assert that any of the alt-narratives, either fully formed or currently forming, are legit.
But my view is informed (aka influenced) by that perspective outlined in disclaimer 1, and so when I see a youtube channel (that was never banned, take note) putting out a headline "They KNEW before it happened", my first instinct is to dig and check the assertions being offered. To lean towards the skeptical take more than towards the non-skeptical take. Call it my personal methodology to counter confirmation bias.
It takes a lot to get me to listen to a YouTube video these days, that is, a youtube video promoting or espousing some disclosure or Breaking! 'Important' information. But I listened to this video about 2/3rds of the way (so far).
The first thing I noticed was A) a LOT of assertion and claims (aka 'this is a fact' assertions) and very little (if not almost no) actual data being shown that is supposedly the foundation for the claims.
I got half way through the video before they even showed ANY of the supposed data, and then it was a blurry screen shot that got thrown up for 6 seconds, and one of the co-hosts clarifying that the screen shot was not about 'the gun' but about the assassin "Tyler Robinson".
But there was enough for me to start with. The FIRST thing you should be able to do with legitimate factual data is to replicate it. So, I dashed over to Google Trends, and whacked in 'tyler james robinson' (no caps, just like their screen shot) and did some runs.
I don't know where THEIR search comes from, by when I ran the name plus the location (Washington DC (Hagersto...)) same as their screenshot, I could not replicate the same result. Nothing on Sept 9.
Check it out: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2025-09-01%202025-10-01&geo=US-MD-511&q=tyler%20james%20robinson&hl=en
Am I missing something?
If I narrow the searh dates to just one week, same result.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2025-09-07%202025-09-14&geo=US-MD-511&q=tyler%20james%20robinson&hl=en
Running the same search for Israel and Google gives back zero. "Not enough data". So, no idea what that's about...
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2025-09-01%202025-10-01&geo=IL&q=tyler%20james%20robinson&hl=en-US
Looking back at the original video from the generator of the data '51-49 with James Li' at youtube, we see that what he did was take his result and then run this through Gemini, Googles own AI, to analyse the results.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX1mn3ijgOc
He does an analysis of "n888kg" but based in "Utah". I could find some results, even though they are not the same as the ones that James Li screenshots
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2025-09-01%202025-09-28&geo=US-UT&q=N888KG&hl=en
100 search hits or so on Sept 7. But james Li's screen shot shows NO hits on Sept 7 but some 29 hits on Sept 9.
huh.
"losee center" - Google Trends would not return a result for me.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2025-09-01%202025-09-28&geo=US-MD-511&q=losee%20center&hl=en
mauser 98
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2025-09-01%202025-09-28&geo=US&q=mauser%2098&hl=en
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2025-08-01%202025-09-28&geo=US&q=mauser%2098&hl=en
Could not find the same results as James Li shows.
Conclusions
One, several possibilities:
A, someone (some operation) has been able to go back to the google trends data and doctor it so that the results do not show up as they did when the video was made or researched.
B, someone doctored the results in order to create a narrative "They knew before hand" but they have since been undoctored.
C, Somehow, the configurations of the searches are being influenced by different factors so that completely different results are delivered.
One of the reasons I'm suspicious is because the "Hey Look! THEY knew before this happened!" narrative was very heavily introduced and pushed just hours after the assassination using the "Fake Publication Date" thing.
Another reason I'm suspicious is because the OBJECT or conclusion of these narratives is almost all the same: "Trump and Kash's FBI is illegitimate. They are lying to us. They cannot be trusted." That makes me skeptical, but yeah, that's my bias.
Two, (Opinion) It's important to NOT just swallow any report or any information you are given, especially if it strongly confirms a bias that you have.
As far as this particular video (I mean, all the inflooencer videos around this video, and there is a bunch of them spruiking James Li's findings) is concerned, I'd add it to the data log, put it up on the shelf. Aka deferred judgment/conclusion.
I could not say its conclusive by any means.
"pretty damning"?
Personally, I don't really think so.
In any case remember: the alt-media sphere (truther sphere) has grown into a massive demographic in the past 8 years, and there are plenty of people - intel orgs, grifters, clickbait artists, and nuts - ready and willing to somehow exploit it and get something out of it.
But of course, there are also genuine investigators and questioners out there as well. Sometimes, however, its not easy to always tell the difference.
Also an old time Q tard here thanks for your perspective.....I might add after any op like an assassination you will see mostly smoke coming from online speculation because most the stuff we see online is being guided by different intelligence agencies around the world,,,,My thought is that Great awakening is heavily penetrated by these types of posters so always be wary about what someone tells you especially when they claim to have previous knowledge of something that has taken place
Very well put, Frac. I am right there with you. I certainly don't believe that I've been black-pilled, but years ago it was much easier to see the truth in the dark. Now it is (intentionally?) obscured by all this misdirection. Recently all this noise has my Bullshit filter totally clogged.
AND YOU ARE DOING WHAT A LOT OF US HERE ON THIS BOARD ARE DOING!!!!
Examining the "FACTS" as they are without all the "bells & whistles"...EXTREMELY important!!!!
In any case I found myself thinking about (or perhaps musing about) the video and its source video (James LI) yesterday. Not so much because I'm interested to know the BREAKING!!!! <here is the truth> reality of the Kirk Assassination event (very low level of interest), but because I'm often curious about how people are processing the information they come across, and how narratives and assertions are generated and perpetuated.
As far as James Li's results are concerned, I found myself wondering how he or others would interpret what they found. What's the plausible explanation for what they think he came across. (The video up above did zero to question it, and simply accepted the results Li found as being direct evidence that "they knew about it beforehand" etc).
But, assuming the results are real in some way, how to explain for them. Would a professional intel team (and one with any real juices) do random internet searches using google without: any VPN? Any very easy and accessible methods to NOT leave traces? TOR? Cloaking devices? They just oh, you know, do a google search from their present location like a bunch of normie noobs? heck, half of the frogs here would know how to NOT do that without batting an eyelid.
Accordingly, the idea that some sort of professional hit team from the Mossad or Clowns or DS Cabal would leave traces like <that> seems pretty far fetched.
Point is this: Once you come up with the data AND assuming its real and verifiable, you need to come up with an explanation for that data, an explanation that is rational, plausible, logical and consistent with the larger framework.
The leap from <this is the data> to <this is clear and unequivocal evidence that (insert preferred bias, etc) is all too often made like spider man jumping across building tops in Manhattan.
You’re a real one, appreciate the high effort.
I used to do what you do but now I just ignore shit like this. Charlie Kirk is psyops layered on psyops originating from competing factions. But at the end of the day it simply doesnt make a difference towards the larger goals of ending the debt slavery, the human trafficking and the theft of our birthright. In the larger scheme it is a distraction to be used to move our eyes off the target.
I'm pretty much where you are. But, my preferred hobby being the shooting down of bullshite and potential bullsh*te, I guess I couldn't resist. Ultimately, I'm more concerned about approach (to information) and methodology than I am about whether the mountains in the distance are blue or green.
I think so.
Which is what we really should be keeping our eyes on...
I agree.
I'm pretty sure Google searches provide completely different results depending on whose computer is used for the search; prior searches "inform" the search engine on what the person is likely to be like, and provide the results accordingly.
I am still not convinced this was an actual assassination. Way too many inconsistencies. Part of the movie? See you in Valhalla? Either way, it did have desirable results.
Up front disclaimer: I'm a mainstream news & mainstream narrative skeptic.
Do some here really accept the mainstream narrative around Kirk's assassination at face value??
R E A L L Y?? 🤣
Careful, lest ye beclown thyself.
A word of caution Wellifthisaintdandy...
There are many frens here who have reached a point to where they do not WANT to know anything different from what they think they already know on this topic.
New information is often useless in these circumstances.
Shout out to the mods for the sticky. Clearly they do not fall in the above category, thank God.
Not believing the narrative from Kash Patel and others (whom we support) is NOT the same thing as not trusting them in the grand plan.
Obviously there's a reason they need to blow smoke. Get it?
I trust them while at the same time understanding disinformation is necessary sometimes.
Down-doots... good.
I suppose I would've gotten more up votes if I was on the opposite side of this coin and instead suggested everyone "Forget any new information. Believe & know only what you believe & know NOW and DO NOT be open to anything new."
The whole Charlie Kirk assasination is no different to me than 911, various bizarre school shootings, Las Vegas, etc They know “awake” people know it’s all BS, but it traumatizes and distracts enough normies to make it worth it. The evil plotters purposely make it sloppy and then enjoy watching us chase clues like we’re in a Sherlock Holmes movie. It’s humiliating and it’s meant to be.
I’d love to see the awakened take the wind out of their sails by not reacting anymore. Everyone in the truth community has broadcast Kirk’s supposed death non-stop, which just plays into the whole elite drama. It does nothing for our team. We’re as hypnotized and dedicated to these assholes as the normies are.
Rise above. Their next hit or shocking event should be in the next month or so—if history is an indicator. Maybe if we stopped reacting they’d stop trying to get a rise from all of us.
It’s all a big show, one big staged reality. We don’t have to play our parts.
Pretty damning.
Watch:" Dinesh D'Souza EXPOSES Tucker & Candace's Lies About" Daniel Schonbuch 15 hours ago. Look into his brilliant mind " the furniture of his brain".