Joe Kent Crosses the Rubicon, and His Latest

Joe Kent submitted his resignation as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center in mid-March. 

Unfortunately, Kent has now embraced a in style conspiracy among some on the proper, which includes “just asking questions” concerning Israel and the homicide of Charlie Kirk. Candace Owens has pushed that narrative for months despite repeatedly failing to present evidence, and in some instances, being immediately debunked. 

In a crossing of the Rubicon second, Kent not too long ago said that he would testify at the trial of Tyler Robinson that the Trump administration improperly shut down the investigation into the homicide to defend a “foreign nexus.” 

Related: Top Aide to Tulsi Gabbard Resigns in Explosive Letter

The following excerpt was supplied by Michael Shellenberger, who carried out the interview. 

The former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, says that the FBI didn’t correctly examine the assassination last fall of conservative chief Charlie Kirk. “The FBI was pretty forceful in saying we couldn’t investigate further,” he told Public. “I saw no action being taken.” 

Tyler Robinson confessed to killing Kirk in a textual content message and a notice to his trans-identified romantic associate. His protection crew could now have the opportunity to use Kent’s allegations that the authorities is suppressing evidence and didn’t do a correct investigation to their benefit. 

Kent said he knew that he could be called as a witness before he made his statements that a “foreign nexus” could have been concerned in Kirk’s assassination. “I was definitely warned of that over and over again,” said Kent. “If I end up having to play that role, then I’ll do it. It’s not something I’m seeking.” 

When pressed that his testimony might help the Robinson protection, Kent said, “Then, honestly, so be it. If it gets us to the truth… That’s obviously the risk I’m taking.” 

Neither Robinson’s attorneys nor the prosecuting attorney responded to requests for remark from Public.

The suggestion that Kent can be keen to help Tyler Robinson’s protection represented a crimson line for TPUSA and Andrew Kolvet, who was Charlie Kirk’s close good friend and podcaster producer. Kolvet took to social media and blasted the former counterterrorism head. 

Shortly after Robinson’s arrest, the prosecutors launched a possible trigger affidavit detailing the evidence gathered immediately after Charlie’s assassination.

The evidence introduced at that time was overwhelming.

In the months that have adopted, we all know the investigation has… pic.twitter.com/zD2jFMsya7

— Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKolvet) March 24, 2026

KOLVET: Shortly after Robinson’s arrest, the prosecutors launched a possible trigger affidavit detailing the evidence gathered immediately after Charlie’s assassination. The evidence introduced at that time was overwhelming. In the months that have adopted, we all know the investigation has continued. 

More particulars will come out in May, when the murderer has a possible trigger listening to and we’re sure there will likely be even more evidence demonstrating why the State believes Tyler Robinson is the murderer. 

But now we’ve a authorities official, Joe Kent, who has reportedly indicated he’s keen to testify on behalf of the protection, to get Robinson off the hook for an evil he dedicated. 

Joe Kent just crossed a crimson line, and it is a large betrayal of Charlie, his spouse, his youngsters, and the whole TPUSA household. 

Just because HE didnt get let into the investigation doesnt imply it wasn’t investigated.

Blake Neff, another producer on The Charlie Kirk Show, also responded, detailing all the evidence against Robinson and the full lack of evidence for something Owens, Kent, and others are claiming or insinuating. 

The news about Joe Kent testifying for Tyler Robinson broke just minutes before today’s show. I didn’t maintain back in my emotions about it. pic.twitter.com/lCnzPcFKp3

— Blake Neff (@BlakeSNeff) March 24, 2026

As for my personal emotions, I discover what Kent is doing to be extremely dishonorable and disgusting. In his place at the NCTC, he wouldn’t have been privy to any info concerning what the FBI did or did not examine concerning Kirk’s homicide. Nor would he be in a place to examine the matter himself. Of course, the FBI would inform him to back off if he certainly did that. It was not his place to become involved, and his doing so might have tainted the prosecution’s case. 

His makes an attempt to converse as an authority on the matter, while conveniently not offering any related info to back his insinuations, are deeply dishonest. If he needed to be an FBI investigator, he ought to have requested Trump to place him in that position. But he wasn’t, and we’re now at a place where he is feeding the madness pushed by some of the worst figures in politics, including Owens. 

To reiterate, there’s nothing to back up any of these conspiracy theories involving Israel and Kirk’s homicide. At this level, it is all “just asking questions” clout-chasing, void of any evidence, and that’s the most charitable rationalization of why these people are doing this. Using a man’s assassination, tormenting his widow in the course of, to juice engagement with baseless claims is a bridge too far. I’m glad to see TPUSA pushing back.