O.LOU🎪

Dear Blake, @BlakeSNeff “These people?” It’s John here. There is really no need to be discourteous or obtuse, or to resort to personal remarks. I don’t see for a moment why the possibility that Charlie might have acted in alignment with a noble and honourable purpose — and a duty to life — should be so disturbing to you. I do understand that you have had a tough and confusing year, and that you may sometimes misidentify those who are simply and sincerely interested in getting to the truth for their friend. The fact is that Charlie knew about things that he did not always discuss with you. He did not always want you included in every conversation. Just as your seniors today may not have necessarily mentioned everything they know to you, especially where highly sensitive matters are concerned. Notwithstanding that, I can’t imagine that the possibility or idea that a small group of people wanted Candace "off the playing field", because she stood in the way of their less-than-benign intentions, is really such a difficult concept for you to fathom. Let me be crystal clear: we are not suggesting that you yourself, or indeed anyone else at Turning Point, was involved in any such foul play or plan. We have never suggested that. But the possibility that Charlie might have known about such a plan — or sensed or perceived that potential foul play towards himself or Candace was potentially real and represented a risk because of strong views they held in common, with which they were influencing humanity, including the geopolitical positions that he knew he had recently taken with the President along side @TuckerCarlson and in alignment and harmony with @RealCandaceO and the trajectory that he was was moving steadily further towards — is hardly beyond the realms of logical possibility. Such things have happened before in mans history. Hence peoples speculation and their frustration. Indeed, Charlie and I discussed threats to his life in London on 18th May 2025, when we spoke alone and privately while walking in Hyde Park while two of his personal private security guards were following politely and diplomatically several yards behind — the very night in fact that you and I first met. Charlie exemplified and applied the Code of Honour in many areas of his life. He was an honourable man. He is not someone who, in a hypothetical situation, would surrender the life of another in order to save his own. I believe he knew his fate. I perceived something of that at dinner with him that night in London. It is one of the reasons that, having driven myself five hours from Cornwall to London for dinner with Charlie on 18 May, and then driven the five hours home again the following day on the 19th May, I made a rather unusual decision. My conversation with Charlie in Hyde Park, had left me in no doubt that Charlie was acutely aware of the risks to his own life. Driving home to Cornwall, I had the private and rather unsettling thought that the wonderful dinner we had just all shared might well be the last time that I would ever see him. Charlie had invited me to hear him speak in Cambridge on the 19th, but he knew I had a prior engagement in Cornwall and could not be there. Charlie had also made it very clear that he really wanted me to come to Oxford. We had been planning for years for Charlie to speak at the Oxford Union. It was something we had discussed many times and we both wanted to see happen. Oxford therefore had a particular significance for us both. The Oxford Union has a historic reputation for upholding Free Speech. On the drive home, I also realised that, apart from the two personal staff travelling with him, yourself Blake and Mickey @Michael_McCoyy and his private military grade security (His security could hardly be counted as friends), Charlie would have no personal friends joining him there in Oxford to see him speak. Erika had not joined us for in London as on previous occasions and was not traveling with him on that trip. Charlie was actually a very private person. For someone who knew such an extraordinary number of people, his circle of actual real friends was surprisingly small. There were inevitably many professional and political transactional relationships around him, but relatively few people with whom there was no transaction at all. That was the nature of our friendship. Over the years, through our efforts and those efforts of private friends that we introduced to Charlie, many multiples of tens of millions of dollars had been raised to support his work and those of his groups. We had always refused any financial compensation arising from that. We never wanted anything from Charlie in return. We were simply friends. And I knew he wanted me to be there on that occasion - At Oxford. By the time I arrived home from our dinner in London I was physically exhausted, but almost immediately on my arrival home at Camelot Castle I said to my wife Irina: “Darling, I am driving back to Oxford tomorrow. I have to see Charlie speak there.” She took one look at me, loving wife that she is, and said: “You are not driving yourself.” She was right. It meant another ten hours on the road. So Irina smoothly and swiftly arranged for Mark, one of our staff, to drive me. Mark knew Charlie too, having previously accompanied Irina, our son and I to Jerusalem with Charlie and Erika. Mark had also helped us host Charlie when he came to London in 2018. So the following day Mark drove me the five hours from Camelot Castle to Oxford. We met Charlie and his team in the green room at the Oxford Union and joined the students for supper. We dined together at the Oxford Union, watched Charlie speak, spent some precious time with him, and then drove the five hours back to Cornwall, returning to Camelot Castle at about 3.30 in the morning. I cannot claim any prescience or foresight that I knew what was going to happen. I did not. But our conversation in London had made a considerable impression on me. I knew that Charlie understood there were risks to his life, and I had a very strong sense that I should make the effort to see him again. I am so glad that I did. We do not know what precipitated the very odd communications that Candace reportedly received from senior Turning Point executives shortly after Charlie’s death. But those communications are not entirely inconsistent with the possibility that there was a known agenda to silence her. Nor do we understand several of the communications made personally to us at that time by senior Turning Point executives. They simply and truly do not make sense if everything is exactly as stated in the official narrative, and if there were nothing to conceal and no intention to conceal anything these the communications to me would not have occurred. The following may also have been withheld from you — or perhaps not — but, out of love for Charlie and for his wife and family, we offered from the very outset, and subsequently, to help to rapidly resolve any misunderstandings arising from Charlie’s death between all the parties concerned with what happened. Because we care deeply and because we were uniquely placed to do so. If people intend to be truthful, there is no need for hostility, discourtesy or unnecessary miscommunication. As the actions of my wife Irina @ImMappin , myself and several of our friends whom we introduced to Charlie helped to fund the buildings in which you work and, figuratively speaking, the chair in which you sit each day, we are understandably also interested in Charlie's legacy and to ensure that it continues as he would have wished. Indeed, the very idea of the Charlie Kirk Show and his sovereign media platform emerged in part from our interactions with him in London and elsewhere. So you might consider the possibility that while we have no wish to be directly involved or personally benefit from it, and nor does Candace, to our knowledge, we do sincerely care about the organisation that we, in part, helped, with Charlie and others to create. Perhaps we have that purpose in common. Perhaps the difference between us — other than the rather obvious difference in courtesy and manners — is that we shared with Charlie certain esoteric understandings and knowledge that he was increasingly waking up to, using and living with. Firstly: That real freedom requires a Code of Honour that not everyone has the luxury or courage to live by. A Code of Honour is a very special thing. And secondly: That the evil in this world must be known and understood; otherwise one remains utterly enslaved and crushed by it. Anyway, Blake, I hope this letter helps you. I will leave you with some personal snapshots and video from the brief time we spent together with Charlie in London and, two days later, in Oxford. When I reviewed them last night, they revealed moments which, although now more than a year ago, show a better side of life — and indeed a better side of you. Only truth restores life and livingness. Perhaps these pleasant memories will restore some of that to you. Only honesty restores joy. But you should know Blake that despite the somewhat disparaging tone you have adopted towards us — both previously and now — we did not, and do not, hold these lapses against you. We understand that the enslavers and enslavements take many forms, and that you, like any of us, may be subject to the same cruel pressures and influences of which so many are still unaware. We wish you well. Kind regards, "These People" (John and Irina) See 🧵 for photos Our Dinner in London at The Mandarin Oriental.

LEARJET OR LIES? ✈️ 🚨: In PT1. A privately owned Bombardier Learjet 60 (N722BD) was flying from Austin,Texas to North Eleuthera in the Bahamas, The Plane then went into a near-vertical high-speed descent and slammed into the ground in Palm Beach!😳#LearJet60 #Palmbeach #N722BD

#BREAKING U.S. military air defense systems seen deployed around President Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach