Perhaps a better headline, lack of real evidence in the Charlie Kirk theatrical traumatic killing.

• Why was there no blood on Kirk’s shirt? He was wearing a bright white shirt and the blood splatter from the wound should’ve been clear to see on the white shirt.
• What was that shaft-like thing under his shirt that almost hit him in the chin? A frame by frame viewing of the video shows something shaped like a stick or something push out against his shirt.
• The alleged gunman walked normally with a rifle shoved down his pants. And then ran with the same gun shoved down his pants. Try to duplicate it and see how it goes.
• Alleged gunman disassembled the gun, jumped off the roof without the gun (again, try jumping off a roof with a rifle in your pants) and ran into the woods empty handed.
• Alleged gunman then reassembled the gun, in world record time, gift wrapped it and, for all intents and purposes, left it in plain sight. He seemed to get away, why leave evidence behind?
• The alleged gunman took the time to scrawl all types of leftist propaganda on his gun and ammo, you know, because the FBI needs motive and we all know the stalwart investigative skills of the FBI in situations like this. They need all the help they can get.
• Charlie was carried away to a black SUV with blacked out windows. What entity drives vehicles like that? Covert government agencies.
• Kirk was not wearing a bulletproof vest under his shirt. When he is carried to the car you can see his stomach because his shirt was pulled up.
• Kirk’s hands looked like a wax dummy in the coffin.
• What grieving widow in her right mind would film herself crying over the “dead” body of her husband? I’ve seen more convincing acts on soap operas. And the speech was poorly done. She should’ve rehearsed it another day.
• Where was the crime scene tape? Why wasn’t the area under and around the pop up canopy taped off so no one could contaminate the scene?
• Why was TPUSA staff allowed to roam freely in the area of the alleged killing and break down the equipment? One might say they were FBI but then why were they not wearing their FBI windbreakers, carrying notebooks, checking the angle of the alleged shot, scouring for possible evidence and bullet fragments, etc.
• The TPUSA staffer used the chair Kirk was sitting in to take the cameras down. This is a major piece of evidence that should have Kirk’s DNA all over it. But a civilian used it as a stool. Why not preserve it for the upcoming Charlie Kirk memorial service.
• They paved the area days after the visual shooting of Kirk. Quite the extensive investigation. Why investigate or preserve evidence and the crime scene when the alleged shooter was gift wrapped to seal up the case?

This is just some anomalies of what I observed.