Final day of pre-trial hearing in Charlie Kirk murder trial | Hour 2

What's going on. Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon to three on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily show prep with all the links, become a patron, go to thepeteclendershow dot com. Make sure you hit the subscribe button. Get every episode for free right to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so much for your support. So we are closing in on the final day. While we are in the final day and closed looking to close the pre trial probable cause hearing in the Tyler Robinson murder trial. Well Charlotte, well see, I always get tripped up on this one. Do you call it the Charlie Kirk murder trial because it's Charlie Kirk's murder, right he was murdered. Or do you say it's the murder trialle of Tyler Robinson because it's the Robinson trial because he's on trial, right and it's a murder trial. But if you say the Robinson murder trial, you could read that either way anyway. And again, this is a probable cause hearing. It's been going on since Monday, contrary to what people want to believe, despite the evidence, I have actually been watching the proceedings. I've been reading through the transcripts and stuff. So that's why I'm able to tell you things that have been introduced as evidence in the case. And these are things that are being asserted based on evidentiary standards, and these are not just asking questions. And if you've listened to this show for any period of time, you should probably have gathered by now that I don't really have a lot of patience when it comes to conspiracy theories in general, because they all follow a familiar pattern. As I went over last hour, I'm not going to go back through it all again, but it's a familiar pattern. It's question, question, question, question, What do you think it means? You know, who did that? Michael Moore, the loose Change guys, right. They never they never make assertions, They never posit the theory like this is what happened, and here's the evidence for why I'm saying this happened. They just leave it open ended because they can't prove anything. So this has angered people who like to participate in this conspiracy theorizing. I understand that I find it to be ghoulish. In this case, I find it to be pretty ghoulish and pretty dangerous because what you are doing could actually get Tyler Robinson acquitted, and maybe that's the goal. I mean. Candice Owens did, in fact offer to speak with Tyler Robinson's defense attorney. She said, she put it, she put out. I think it was a tweet if I remember correctly, or maybe it was a transcript of her comments that I was reading, where she said, you know, Tyler Robinson's defense team, call me. I'll fill you in. And there is this attraction to the true crime genre, and the podcast space is full of it, full of these types of shows, and some of them are quality and some of them are not. And this goes to one of the comments I made about the institutions last hour in the media Realm specifically, which is that the institutions provide guard rails. And you may say, I don't want any guardrails, and that's what you have in the podcast sphere. You have people who used to operate or never did, inside systems, inside institutions that would provide guardrails. And in this case, I'm thinking specifically of Tucker Carlson he would have editors, producers and stuff people that would that would keep him within these within these guardrails, Like you can't go that far. You can't say that that's too much, there's no evidence for that whatever, and that helped him, and what you see him doing now is him with no guardrails. So like, I don't believe I used to believe that that something happened and he changed or whatever. But the more I the more I see what he says and read what he says, it's I get the feeling. Now. I'm starting to believe that he has always felt like this, and he's always believed these things for a long time. It's just now he doesn't have the guardrails. And guardrails can be very effective, very useful. Now they can be too constricting, to be sure. But here's the thing about institutions and Candy Crush. I'm going to get back to your last text here, but I'm not gonna like after this, I got to move on to other things because I've got other pieces of content here that I need to get to. And I'm devoting a lot of time to you because I do want to believe that I can that I can at least let you entertain, convince you to entertain the idea that you're drinking from a poisoned cup, because I do believe you are. Okay, I do believe you are. This is black pilling, and I don't want that for anybody. All institutions are man made, all of them, right, All of the institutions of Western society are man made constructs, and as such, they decay, they deteriorate, they can be taken over, they can be saidabotaged, They could be used for good or bad. Right, you have individuals inside of the institutions that can alter the mission, the practices, right, all of that, and I don't deny any of that. Like, if you've listened to this program, you know I am very critical of media institutions because I came from them, I was trained in it, I went to work in it, and I saw the corruption. And I don't mean bribery and all that stuff. I mean the degradation of principles and ethics and you know, what people think is a story and what's not, and the cleansing of all newsrooms of any kind of opposing views on what is news and how to cover those stories. Right, So my criticisms of those institutions has never been about destroying them, although some of them probably do need to be wiped away as businesses, because if you're not providing a service or a product that is of value, then you go out of business. Right, But the point of the criticism is to maybe get them to course correct, because all institutions have to be maintained, and I think for a long time Conservatives have surrendered the battlefield in a lot of these institutions, education, higher ed now. I mean, don't get me wrong, the left ran Conservatives out of a lot of these places so they could control them. Politics being downstream of culture, although you know it does sometimes it goes back and forth. They influence each other. But I think for a long time conservatives just surrendered the field, and now they don't trust any of these institutions. I understand why. However, that does not mean in this particular case, when you're looking at this particular case, your views of institutional rot. If you're going to take a maximalist view and say what every court, every judge, every prosecutor, every law enforcement investigator at the local, state, federal levels, that every single one of them is corrupt and everybody is engaged in some sort of a conspiracy to hide the quote truth. That is not a conservative position. It's just not. Because you're robbing every individual of their own agency, all of the individuals involved, You're assuming all sorts of things about what they value and what their principles are. You're lumping everybody in as if they are all the worst. And I don't do that. So when you go into a courtroom and they're presenting the evidence, I look at that as if I'm a juror and I'm looking at this evidence, and then I hear the defense argue against the evidence, and then I have to try to kind of decide, like, is this believable that it's that this is true or not? And then if it's true, you put it over here with evidence that points towards guilt. If I say, now this isn't I'm not convinced of this, then it goes over onto this other pile of not proving guilt. Right, And then you look at the next piece of evidence, and the next, and the next, and the next and the next, and that builds your case. And when you have all of the evidence stacked up in one side, and by the way, do you know what the defense's response was to the Lance twig or twigs chat messages and his testimony. Nothing, They had no response for it. That's odd. No, maybe they're in on it. Yeah, they're part of the conspiracy, all right. For over a year now, you've heard me talking about Create a Video. Great local company in mint Hill that has helped more than two million families preserve their memories by turning old photos, VHS tapes, film reels and slides into lasting keepsakes. Now creative videos helping families and groups create brand new memories while they're traveling. Introducing group travel videos perfect for family reunions, church mission trips, group vacations, destination weddings, student trips, senior adult groups, sports teams. I mean, really, any gathering of people that you care about that's traveling together. Group travel Videos gives your traveling pack a private app where everyone can share photos during the trip, send messages, share schedules and important documents. Even a traveler safety locator feature that works only during the trip, and family members and friends back home can follow along and enjoy the experience in real time. No social media, no ads, It's totally private. No emails, phone numbers, account setups, or hassles. With group travel videos, you'll capture today's moments on your special trip while they're happening. Then after the trip we're gathering, they'll professionally turn your shared moments into a beautiful storytelling video that your whole group can stream and download and treasure for years. Check out Group travel Videos dot com. That's group travel Videos dot com. Or call seven oh four eight four six seventy eight seventy extension two o six. And when you do that, ask for Katie. But Pete, can I just email? Well, yes you can. You can email Katie Katie at group travel videos dot com. Group travel videos from old memories to new adventures, preserving life's moments for a lifetime. Email from Chris, who says, Pete, why are you measuring dumbassrie as a metric buttload on the metric system, nobody knows how much a buttload of Nobody knows how much of a buttload that is. We are Americans. We only know the Imperial butt load system. That's fair. That is fair, all right? So last message I will read here from Candy Crusher my assertion because I said, what's your assertion? Make your assertion. My assertion is you are being intentionally disingenuous about the case, So just asking questions. And when I'm making my assertion and you're not making an assertion, and then I ask you to make it, then you say I don't have an assertion. See, this is the problem I have in all of these debates and discussions with conspiracy theorists. You want me to treat you as if you're acting in a good faith search for truth, right, but you don't want to make it any assertions that I can then dismantle that I can then address or maybe even agree with. This is the same pattern they go on to say, I am neutral on it. Yes I'm right wing, very right wing, and no, I don't trust our institutions. They have given me no reason in my lifetime to do so and are incredibly untrustworthy. So again, you can be skeptical and wary of institutions, to be sure, But if you are going to submit, if you're going to assert that you have been given no reason in your lifetime to trust any institution, then you have been blackpilled. You've been demoralized. The targeted ssyop of demoralization has worked on you, because if you honestly believe that no institution of any sort has ever given you a reason to trust, it, has ever given you any benefit, has done anything good for you in your life. Like, look around this entire society. That's why I say the fish doesn't know. It's wet. Like the most wealthy, prosperous, healthiest society ever of human beings in existence. This is what the institutions helped to build. That does not mean they're infallible, perfect, not in need of repair reform in some case, yes, some need to be completely scrapped and started over again. Short, but that's a black pill mentality, pessimistic, overly cynical. My problem, more so is with your criticism of the people who are investigating this death in a deep way. See, you are attributing to them a good faith pursuit of truth because you want to, and you are withholding that from me because you think I'm just trying to push the authoritarian line. I'm just a bootlooker for. The FBI or something like that, because I'm looking at the evidence presented in court and I'm saying all of this evidence points at Tyler Robinson. That seems like the most likely scenario here rather than just fabricating or extrapolating or theorizing, just asking questions on everything, so you're assuming things about people's motives. There's also a thing I will tell you if you're not aware of this. It's a thing called in the media world. It's called audience capture. Sure, and it could happen to people in my position here. It can happen in particularly so with the podcast world. That if you do a topic and you get a lot of impressions, a lot of downloads, a lot of views, a lot of likes, that drives up your revenue. And so you'll keep doing that, and you'll keep following the audience wherever the audience is going, because you don't want to lose them. You've been captured by your audience, and you're not actually pursuing truth. You're pursuing what your audience wants to be true, because they feel like they are now admitted into this gnosticism, this knowledge that they're now welcomed into the inner circle, that they have a certain level of understanding and knowledge that all of the regular people do not, and that's an energizing feeling. Blowing them off as conspiracy theoristsites and then come, I don't believe I've called the anti Semites. I do think that they land on Israel and the Jews an awful lot. But there is that, and. Then coming on the radio and saying just trust the institutions. Guys didn't say that either. It's what conservatives have always done. So again, if you're going to quote me, please actually quote what I said. I said, you cannot just completely abandon all of the trust in every single person, in all of the institutions. Like that. That's irrational. And if you're going to pitch this idea that I have to now not trust any institution, then that is not a conservative position because there are people and there are institutions that are worthy of trust. Didn't we just elect Trump to drain the swamp aka the institutions that make up the deep state? Pete, This is why I am upset. You cannot trust the institutions just because your side is in power. And this is not about Trump or who sides in power. This is about the courtroom and the rules of evidence and the evidence that is being presented. That's the point of the trials that you're supposed to just look at the evidence. Where does it lead? Also, Candice and others have introduced a lot of evidence and inconsistencies about this case. I disagree brushing them off just because you don't like their opinion on israel Is. So she's the one who brought Israel into it. She's the one who's talking about the Israelis blow up his microphone to kill him. She said that, not me. Do not blame me for bringing Israel into this. She did. She did that. When did conservatives quote unquote suddenly start acting like the worst leftist and telling everyone that doesn't play along with their narratives that this isn't about a narrative, dude or lady. This isn't about a narrative. This is about the evidence. What is the evidence show? And the evidence does not show canis owens to be correct on like anything? That's the point the defense in the probable cause pre trial hearing. Again, this is just to determine whether or not there's enough evidence to go to trial, which my prediction on this is yes. They're trying to now raise doubts about the DNA, saying like, for example, let me do this now. So yesterday they introduced all the prosecution introduced the DNA analysis that was done on a whole bunch of stuff. For example, they took. Swabs of the stock and bolt of the rifle, the butt plate of the rifle, the trigger and trigger guard, the four end, and a thirty odd six cartridge from the rifle, swabs of the barrel and other and another thirty odd six cartridge from the rifle, the scope on the rifle. They also did DNA evidence for buttons on the dremal tool, the cord of the dremal tool that was used to do the engravings that he you know, the messages that he wrote. You know, hey, fascist catch that kind of stuff, and then the longest metal bit of the dremal tool, the shortest metal bit, and then one of the etched cartridges with the engraving. Test shot. Yeah, he did a test shot. He engraved a test shot, and all of these uh DNA analyzes came back. Essentially, I'm gonna read to you because this was the same thing over and over and over again. The DNA profiles from all of this stuff, except for the scope. All of these things said the DNA profiles are at least one trillion times more likely if they originated from Tyler Robinson as the major components and two unrelated unknown individuals than if they originated from three unrelated unknown individuals. So, in other words, the. Chances are at least a trillion times more likely that Tyler Robinson's DNA is what they found. And I hear the Candice Owens fans saying, so you're saying, there's a chance it's not him. Okay, it's a trillion times more likely. And so today the defense put on the analysts who did the testing, okay for the labs, and they're trying to get to this, you know, one and a trillion thing, right, And the analyst says, well, we cap the statistics at one trillion. We cap it at that because the actual number could be a lot higher. It could be quintillion or octillion. We choose to cap it at a trillion because it has a meaning, I think to people that can understand what a trillion is, an octilion, a quintillion gets a little high at that point, So we cap it at a trillion. In other words, it's at least a trillion. It could be multiples of that. The chances of it not being Tyler Robinson could quite literally be near impossible, like mathematically, like, what are the chances of that there aren't Like you would have to have DNA from like every human being that ever lived, and then maybe some other like I don't know, unrelated species. Seriously, the chances of that not being his DNA is next to impossible. So I guess if that's the problem for the defense, is the evidence that's their problem, And if they make any of the arguments that Candice Owens has been making on our podcast, If the defense actually makes any of those arguments, I'd be surprised, because the defense attorneys understand how the rules of evidence work and what is and isn't admissible, what is reasonable, what they'll be able to prove right this morning, Also, the defense was angry that there was a handwritten letter. This was the confession note. It was not supposed to be captured by the TV cameras in the courtroom, but it was mistakenly for about two seconds it was. Then, of course screenshot had shared all over social media and the like, and so this got the defense mad about it, and they were like, we need to ban all of the cameras out of the courtroom, which is what they've been argued they've been arguing for that from the very beginning, and the judge did not allow that, but he did say no more broadcasting of any more evidence for the rest of the pre trial probable cause hearing, which is ending today. So at the end of the day, we do expect the judge to make a ruling as to whether or not there's probable cause to move forward. So so there was that the testimony continues. Then there is this. This is an account on Twitter and YouTube. He goes by Paramount Tactical. It's the name of his company. His name is Gary Melton, and he has been angering a lot of the conspiracy theorists on this for quite a while because he is in fact a ballistics expert like but he recognizes and he talks about how there are these different kinds of ballistic expertise. I believe he says internal, external, and terminal. And so for people who say that the thirty ought to six, which is uh, that's the cartridge that was used, the kind of bullet basically you know, the entry wound, the exit wound, that would never have behaved like this. And he actually has examples. He produces four examples, not during the trial. By the way, this is during an interview that he did on the Jeremy Boring podcast, and he talks about four people, one being Charlie Kirk, another Martin Luther King, same caliber, same thing happened to him, by the way, no exit wound. There was also a fellow Green Beret who was shot with a thirty odd six from closer range, no exit wound. And then another individual named Shane Hill all spine hits, no exit wounds. All right. Here is Gary Melton. He goes by the online name Paramount Tactical. It's the name of his company. And here's what he has to say about the thirty odd six, you know, bullet that was used in the the assassination of Charliekirk. And by the way, I've got a message that somebody said, oh you know, they didn't recover a bullet from it. They did and it was entered into evidence. So here you go. Right now, I know I only know four people that have been shot with a thirty odd six. That is Charlie Kirk, Martin Luther King, a fellow Green Brain named Chuck Ritter. He was actually shot with seven six two by fifty four, which is the exact ballistic equivalent of thirty odd six. He was shot from twenty five yards away. It also hit him and went in between his ribs, hit a spine, deflected down. Nowly was there no exit wound. He's still alive and it was all caught on video, and like he even posted as like he came on here and he's like, yeah, it can happen to be like if that happened to me, you're a liar. Okay, here's a video of it. Here's a video of this happening. Oh yeah, you're a liar. Here's my medical records, here's the pictures that you're a liar. Uh. And then I just found somebody sent me a new one. A guy named Shane Hill also shot from a very short distance away a thirty out six hit him in the spine. And what's interesting to me, because look, I've been shooting long range for over twenty years, is what I do for I teach long range ballistics for a living. We have our own line of long range precision custom rifles. Like this is what I do. But what I don't sit around and do, and most people don't. I don't care how good they are ballistics or whatever else, like what we're not there's you know, there's internal, external and terminal ballistics. Most people are not sitting around studying terminal ballistics and we just don't, right. And on top of that, specific to thirty odd six, I thought it was a lot less likely to stay in the body or it was more likely to exit than even I. And once I started actually researching that piece, and part of that was saying Gary, yeah, you're a ballistics expert, but do you really know that much about terminal balistics thirty odd six? Have you studied that? And the answer is no. So you start going back and you hear about Martha Luke King, you start looking at what was going on with that, and there's a lot of controversy around Martin Luther King, but what has never been contested was whether or not he was shout with a thirty OT six. That's just not there and we see almost exact results. So there are examples of this happening. So for people to say this is impossible, that's not true. It is possible. Also, keep in mind the rifle was like a eighty eighty something year old rifle, and it was and that does have an impact on the velocity, so I'm told. So I've read, and four hun undred feet away and an elevation change of like sixty eight feet higher, and so the bullet's coming down, right, It's not a straight line, it's coming down. And again, bullet was recovered. So there were all these conspiracies out there that there was no autopsy. That's not true. The autopsy report was submitted to the court as evidence this week. They and the conspiracy theorists were saying there was no bullet recovered. That's also not true. There was a bullet recovered. I saw it when it was presented as evidence yesterday or the day before. Also came out yesterday in the search of Robinson's home. Tyler Robinson's home, there were AMMO boxes. These were Remington Core locked soft point rounds, and according to Fennix Ammunition, these core locked soft point rounds are specifically designed to deform, slow down, and prevent an exit wound. They are available at literally every single gun store in sporting goods store that sells Ammo. Sixteen of the seventeen thirty odd six varieties manufactured by Remington use some type of expanding, deforming, or fragmenting bullet only one of their products uses a full metal jacket projectile that could or would be expected to leave an exit wound, he says. Fenixamo says, this is the most easily debunked claim of the entire web of lies. It's mind blowing that this is actually what. It's really mind blowing considering this is exactly what you would use in an assassination. You would not use a full metal jacket Casey, you wouldn't do it. So they they found a box of this particular AMMO, and that's also the AMMO that was in the rifle and in Charlie Kirk. They also did not find any thirty odd six weapons in the house. So you got a box of the AMMO, but no gun for that ammo, which is weird, right, That would be weird, particularly when you know you've already recovered the gun that the AMMO fits. There were also three shooting targets, and this was interesting. They put them all up side by side. And remember there was the one casing that had etched into it test shot and it had been fired and so and he also had these three paper targets and they had them all lined up next to each other, and one of them. The first one had the perforations kind of in the outer rings, and then the second one you saw them closer, grouping into the bulls eye. And then on the third one you see a bullseye and several near bullseyes, so you can see, like I assume that they didn't say because they don't know like the progression of them, but it would like that would indicate to me that you are adjusting your your firing right in order to get close, because generally speaking, people want to shoot closer to the bulls eye. You know, I know I'm making an assumption on that, but it would seem to me to indicate that you're, you know, you're sighting in and you're you're taking shots, you're taking practice shots, and you're getting closer to the bulls eye, so you're you're you're getting your sights aligned. That's what it seemed like to me. They also found the dremal tool used for the engraving as well. That Morse. From that Morse TV, he says, we have had ten months of random people on the Internet pretending to be ballistics experts without even knowing the exact type of ammunition that was used. Then today we finally learned that a Remington core locked soft point round was used. It controlled expansion hunting bullet with a copper jacket and exposed lead tip that is intentionally designed to deform and expand on impact, minimizing full penetration. As it would turn out, all of the Internet experts are pretty much just bleeping morons. It does make you wonder, all right, makes you wonder. This is what happens, By the way, when theories meet the burden of proof, when you actually have to go in make assertions, present evidence, and prove to people that what you are restarting is true, that this is what happened. And again, this has been built up over hundreds of years, through thousands of thousands of cases to create these standards so we can best derived at what is true. All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you so much for listening. I could not do the show without your support and the support of the businesses that advertise on the podcast, so if you'd like, please support them too and tell them you heard it here. You can also become a patron at my Patreon page or go to thepetecleanershow dot com. Again, thank you so much. For listening, and don't break anything while I'm gone.