By John Leake

Turning Point Spokesman: “No Exit Wound a Miracle”

Charlie Kirk Show producer Andrew Kolvet repeats extremely dubious claim purportedly made by “the surgeon who operated on Kirk.”

Monday Blaze Media (relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey) reported the following:

Turning Point USA spokesman and executive producer of the “Charlie Kirk Show” Andrew Kolvet revealed new details about the shooting that even doctors are calling a miracle. According to Kolvet, the surgeon who operated on Kirk claimed that the high-velocity bullet was powerful enough to kill multiple large animals — and “should have gone through” his body. But for some reason, Kirk’s body was able to stop it.

“I want to address some of the discussion about the lack of an exit wound with Charlie,” Kolvet wrote in a post on X.

“The fact that there wasn’t an exit wound is probably another miracle, and I want people to know,” Kolvet continued, explaining that he had spoken with the surgeon who worked on Charlie in the hospital.

“He said the bullet ‘absolutely should have gone through, which is very very normal for a high powered, high velocity round. I’ve seen wounds from this caliber many times and they always just go through everything. This would have taken a moose or two down, an elk, etc,’” he recalled.

“But it didn’t go through. Charlie’s body stopped it,” he added.

When he mentioned to the doctor that there were “dozens of staff, students, and special guests standing directly behind Charlie” when he was shot, the doctor reportedly replied, “It was an absolute miracle that someone else didn’t get killed.”

“His bone was so healthy and the density was so so impressive that he’s like the man of steel,” Kolvet recalls the doctor saying.

This is not a credible statement, and it raises a number of concerns.

It strikes me as very perplexing that a “surgeon operated on Kirk,” because in the video of the shooting, Charlie reacted with a decorticate posture—that is, an abnormal body posture characterized by flexion of the upper limbs—caused by severe trauma to the central nervous system. This indicates that the bullet either directly struck his cervical spinal cord, or the shock wave of the supersonic bullet passing near his spinal cord traumatized it.

A 150-grain, .30-06 bullet’s energy at 150 yards from the muzzle varies by ammunition, but a common hunting cartridge has an estimated value of approximately 1,800-2,000 foot-pounds (with the bullet traveling at about 2500 feet per second). In other words, the .30 caliber (.30 inch diameter) metal projectile struck his neck with sufficient kinetic energy to move a 2,000 pound mass a linear distance of one foot.

If the bullet that struck Charlie’s cervical spinal cord was a .30-06 fired from 150 yards away, it would have:

1). Severed his spinal cord, killing him instantly.

2). Passed through his neck.

Note that the cervical vertebrae are supported by strong muscles and have high compressive strength, but are far too delicate to stop a .30-06 bullet traveling at 2,500 feet per second.

If ALL of the kinetic energy of the bullet was absorbed by Charlie’s neck, it would have done spectacular trauma to his neck, as distinct from producing the clean bullet hole visible in the video footage that ruptured his Carotid artery.

Though I appreciate that some may find a supernatural explanation to be consoling, it seems to me that the investigation should not rest on the this explanation.

As I wrote a few weeks ago: If I were investigating the murder, I would consider the hypothesis that Charlie was shot with a weapon equipped with a suppressor and loaded with a subsonic cartridge to further reduce the sound. I have seen footage of someone firing a rifle with this setup, and the shot was amazingly quiet. The effective range of such a weapon is about 100 yards or less, and the shooter must be very skilled.

However, such a setup could fire a subsonic projectile that would penetrate a human neck without passing through it. In this scenario, the actual assassin (firing the suppressed rifle) hypothetically coordinated the timing of his shot with someone else firing a normal (supersonic and loud) rifle cartridge into the air at the same time to create a distraction or red herring.

In a functioning society in which the people trust their authorities—including their medical examiners—it would be easy to discover what happened and to disclose at least a preliminary report that would satisfy most reasonable people. The trouble our Republic is facing now is that so many of us no longer trust our federal and state authorities to tell us the truth.

For example, we have strong grounds for suspecting that medical examiners are not diligently investigating (with the proper analytic methods) unexpected, fatal cardiac arrests in young people to determine if they were caused by vaccine-induced myocarditis.

Share

By John Leake

“Some 40% to 70% of mothers who have children with autism believe that their child was injured by a vaccine.”

Within medical freedom circles, much of the commentary on the September 22 press conference has focused on Tylenol being presented as the prime suspect for the autism epidemic.

While President Trump’s medical advisors chose to focus exclusively on Tylenol—therefore revealing that they have, to some degree, been captured by the Vaccine Cartel—HHS Secretary Kennedy managed to make what I believe to be the most important statement of the press conference.

Finally, autism is a complex disorder with multifactorial etiology. We are continuing to investigate a multiplicity of potential causes where no areas of taboo. One area that we are closely examining, as the president mentioned, is vaccines. Some 40% to 70% of mothers who have children with autism believe that their child was injured by a vaccine. President Trump believes that we should be listening to these mothers instead of gaslighting and marginalizing them, like prior administrations.

As Andy Wakefield has been saying for almost thirty years, the key to determining the cause of autism lies in the witness testimony of mothers.

In the matter of autism, mothers are the best witnesses because they “keep their attention fixed upon what lies nearest”—namely, the behavior, moods, and health of their infants.

It is an astonishing fact that almost none of the literature on autism devotes serious attention to case studies like that of Hannah Poling, documented by J.S. Poling, A.W. Zimmerman et al. in their seminal paper Developmental regression and mitochondrial dysfunction in a child with autism.

For the record, in the case of Hannah Poling, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims acknowledged—albeit in a deal it tried to keep secret—that the girl’s regression into autism had been caused by a large number of vaccines administered all at once.

As we document in our new book, Vaccines: Mythology, Ideology, and Reality, Hannah’s parents are far from being alone. Thousands of parents have told similar stories. Hannah’s father, Dr. Jon Poling, had the advantage of being a neurologist at the Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, so the U.S. government found his witness testimony impossible to dismiss.

Contrast the common practice of dismissing parents’ testimony in the matter of autism with our standard methods for investigating child abductions. When a child doesn’t come home from school, a detective doesn’t start by consulting the literature on criminology and criminal psychology. No, he interviews the child’s parents and teachers to establish a timeline and to learn about the child’s activities, social circles, habits, and interests.

At the McCullough Foundation, we are forging a new path, beyond the obscurantism of the high priesthood that has controlled the discourse about autism since it waged its calumnious campaign against Dr. Andrew Wakefield twenty years ago.

We are now getting organized to conduct a major case series study on children who had normal births, achieved all developmental milestones during their first twelve to nineteen months of life, but then regressed into autism. Though we will be very thorough and searching in our questions, our inquiry will be guided by the imperative to listen to the mothers.

This will be a major, time consuming enterprise, and we can use your support. Please click on the image below to make a tax-free donation. If you would like to donate more than $1,000., please mail a check to our McCullough Foundation office.

6320 Lyndon B. Johnson Fwy, Suite 221/ Dallas, Texas, 75240

If you are contemplating making a major donation and would like to learn about our work in greater detail, please email me at johnsearsleake@mcculloughfnd.net

Share