Earthquake in the US - FBI blocks probe into foreign state involvement in Kirk murder - Israel link causes uproar

Severe political and institutional turmoil is being caused by the revelation in the New York Times that FBI Director, Kash Patel, prevented the office of the head of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Tulsi Gabbard, from investigating possible involvement by a foreign power in the murder of patriotic activist Charlie Kirk. According to anonymous sources cited by the newspaper, the case has caused a deep rift between top officials in the Trump administration and federal security agencies.

The case timeline

Gabbard’s close associate and advisor, Joe Kent, initiated an internal investigation to determine if the murder of Kirk was backed or supported by a foreign power. Information suggests that Kent had access to internal FBI files related to the case, provoking a strong reaction from Patel. The FBI director deemed that Kent had “exceeded his duties” and intervened in an active criminal investigation. This led to a critical meeting at the White House, where the political and legal implications of the case were discussed.

Kash Patel - Tulsi Gabbard

Tension in the White House

According to the report, the meeting was attended by Kash Patel, Joe Kent, Tulsi Gabbard, US Vice President JD Vance, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wilies, and high-ranking officials from the Department of Justice. The disagreements were intense: Patel argued that Kent’s investigation could obstruct the official process and lead to the leakage of sensitive data, while Gabbard insisted that there was strong evidence of foreign involvement that should not be ignored.

Israel involvement – Rumors, indications, and political dimensions

Although the New York Times does not explicitly name any country, sources close to Joe Kent are reported to have implied that Israel may have had indirect involvement in the case. According to these sources, Kent had requested an investigation into financial and communications connections between Kirk and Israeli political organizations, believing that some of the activist's recent comments regarding US-Israeli policy had caused strong discontent in Israeli diplomatic circles. Sources close to the FBI, however, denied any suggestion of Israeli involvement, calling the information “unconfirmed and highly politicized.” Nevertheless, the speculation caused deep concern within the White House, as such a development could trigger a crisis of confidence between Washington and Tel Aviv — two countries that maintain close strategic cooperation. Analysts estimate that even the slightest suspicion of Israel's involvement, whether direct or through third parties, could destabilize political discourse in the US, particularly ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, where the issue of foreign influence remains extremely sensitive.

Charlie Kirk

When Kirk provoked Israel's anger

The patriotic activist had provoked the anger of Israeli circles regarding the Hamas attack on 10/7/2023, when he implied a deliberate inaction by Tel Aviv authorities to allow the massacre to happen, in order for Netanyahu's subsequent military operations across the Middle East to follow. "I've been to Israel many times. The whole country is a fortress. It is very hard for me to believe this happened (the Hamas attack)," Kirk, who had enormous reach in the US, used to say. In a letter to Benjamin Netanyahu, Kirk stressed that Israel "is losing the information war," that the US "Gen Z" base views Israel negatively, and listed a catalog of questions he was being asked in universities: Is Israel an apartheid state? Why is Israel committing genocide? Are the US helping Israel in the genocide of Palestinians?

Although Kirk appeared to be an ardent supporter of Israel, these statements brought him into conflict with segments of the Israeli or pro-Israeli community because:

1. He was questioning Israel's performance or strategy (how did this happen in a fortress-country?).

2. He was criticizing Israel's supporters for how they treated those who posed questions.

3. He was challenging the narrative surrounding the events in Gaza, which is viewed by many Israel supporters as an unprovoked attack on Israel's national security or legitimacy.

The tension primarily lay in the fact that his criticism did not come from an anti-Israeli position but from a position of support for Israel — and this is considered by some to be more “dangerous” because it creates internal rifts within the pro-Israeli community.

The "ambush" on Kirk

According to a report by The Grayzone, this change of stance came into direct conflict with powerful pro-Israeli actors who shape American politics, with a characteristic example being a meeting organized for him by billionaire Bill Ackman, the first sign of a political clash with Israel. The meeting, which took place in early August, was organized in the Hamptons on the pretext of discussing the rise of socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani in the race for the mayor of New York. However, as The Grayzone reveals, the meeting turned into an "ambush" for Kirk, with Ackman and other pro-Zionists attacking him for his increasing criticism of Israel's policy. Among the participants were figures such as Seth Dillon, CEO of the Babylon Bee, Xaviaer DuRoussear of PragerU, Emily Wilson (known for her influence on social media), and other pro-Zionists. According to sources, the discussion focused on the accusation that Kirk had "betrayed" his support for Israel, and there was intense pressure for him to back down from his new stance. Netanyahu himself has dismissed the rumors of a possible Israeli involvement in Kirk's murder as conspiracy theories. “Joseph Goebbels had said that the bigger the lie, the faster it spreads. Someone fabricated such a monstrous lie, that Israel had any connection to the horrific murder of Charlie Kirk. This is crazy, false, and outrageous,” he stated. He added that Charlie Kirk was "a giant, a once-in-a-century talent" and emphasized the friendship he expressed toward Israel and vice versa. "He had written me a letter just a few months ago full of love for the Jewish people and our common Judeo-Christian civilization."

Tulsi Gabbard 

Fear for the Robinson defense - Institutional crisis

Government officials express concern that Kent's independent investigation could weaken the indictment against the main suspect, Robinson, by offering the defense the argument that "more than one perpetrator" may have been involved. This possibility would call the entire criminal procedure into question and turn the trial into a political confrontation with international implications. The Kirk case is now bordering on an institutional crisis. On one hand, the FBI is accused of limiting the independent investigation for reasons of political expediency; on the other, Gabbard's team insists that transparency is a matter of national security. If foreign involvement is proven — and even more so, if any involvement by Israel is revealed — the consequences for US international relations will be explosive. Overall, the murder of Charlie Kirk on 9/10/2025 is evolving into one of the darkest and most complex cases in the American political scene. The confrontation between the FBI, Gabbard, and the White House, combined with rumors of foreign — Israeli — involvement, opens a dangerous chapter for political transparency in the United States. If the New York Times' information is verified, Washington risks finding itself at the center of an international crisis of confidence, where the lines between national security, political expediency, and international influence become blurrier than ever.

www.bankingnews.gr