Candace Owens has revealed a “glaring oddity” in the security protocols surrounding Charlie Kirk, specifically concerning the event scheduled immediately after his death.
Brian Harpole, who oversees security for Charlie Kirk, has previously emphasized the meticulous advance planning involved in their events, which includes obtaining permits, using questionnaires, and working closely with local authorities. However, the lack of any security measures for the September 11th event at Therese Bible College, the next stop on Kirk’s tour, starkly contradicts Harpole’s assertions and raises significant questions about potential prior knowledge regarding Kirk’s situation.
This article delves into Harpole’s outlined security protocols, contrasts them with the absence of preparation for the September 11th gathering, and considers the troubling implications of this inconsistency.
🚨 BOMBSHELL Charlie Kirk’s Security Team Had ZERO Plan for the NEXT TOUR STOP – As If They KNEW He Wouldn’t Make It! 😱
Harpole also spoke of coordinating with entire police departments and discussing the deployment of drones, highlighting a robust level of engagement with local law enforcement. His detailed accounts suggest a standard of thorough and proactive security planning typically expected for Kirk’s events.
In dramatic contrast to Harpole’s claims, the September 11th event at Therese Bible College in Woodland Park, Colorado, had no security plan whatsoever. Candace Owens received inside information from someone involved in the event’s planning, revealing that following Kirk’s assassination, a “panicked meeting” was convened.
Brian Harpole’s Stated Security Protocols
This meeting, led by the chief of police, aimed to convert the event into a vigil, leaving attendees astonished upon learning: “they had absolutely no security plan in place.” Owens directly questioned: “Why didn’t Dan Flood, Brian Harpole, and Turning Point USA’s security coordinate with the police departments up in Colorado?” The lack of preparation for a prominent event, particularly one immediately succeeding another tour stop, directly opposes Harpole’s stated standard operating procedures.
The stark inconsistency between Harpole’s detailed security claims and the complete lack of preparation for the September 11th event serves as a significant red flag, suggesting a suspicious omission. Owens referred to this as “another glaring oddity in this security protocol,” hinting at a pattern of irregularities. This prompts the critical question: if standard procedures involve weeks of advance preparation and coordination, why was this specific event entirely neglected, especially given its closeness to a previous engagement?
The September 11th Event: Zero Charlie Kirk Security Plan
In stark contrast to Harpole’s claims, the event scheduled for September 11th at Therese Bible College in Woodland Park, Colorado, had absolutely no security plan in place. Candace Owens received a tip from someone directly involved with the event’s planning, revealing that after Kirk’s assassination, a “panicked meeting” took place.
This meeting, headed by the chief of police, was to transform the event into a vigil, and attendees were shocked to discover: “they had absolutely no security plan in place.” Owens questioned directly: “Why didn’t Dan Flood and Brian Harpole and Turning Point USA’s security have any coordination with the police departments up in Colorado?” The complete absence of planning for a high-profile event, especially one immediately following another tour stop, stands as a direct contradiction to Harpole’s described standard operating procedures.
The Discrepancy: A Suspicious Omission
The glaring inconsistency between Harpole’s detailed security claims and the total lack of preparation for the September 11th event constitutes a massive red flag, suggesting a deeply suspicious omission. Owens characterized this as “another glaring oddity in this security protocol,” implying a pattern of irregularities. This raises the question: if standard procedure required weeks of advance planning and coordination, why did they completely overlook this particular event, especially given its proximity to a previous engagement?
The lack of “busy work,” permitting, questionnaires, or police coordination for an event of this nature is unprecedented according to Harpole’s own statements. This omission is not merely sloppy; it strongly implies that the security team, or elements within it, may have had foreknowledge that Charlie Kirk would not make it to the September 11th event.
Conclusion: Unsettling Questions and the Search for Truth
The stark contrast between Brian Harpole’s detailed security protocols and the complete absence of planning for Charlie Kirk’s September 11th event demands immediate answers. This “glaring oddity” suggests a potential cover-up or, at minimum, a gross negligence that directly implicates those responsible for Kirk’s safety. The public deserves a full and transparent explanation for why a standard security protocol was abandoned for a critical event, especially when the question looms: did they already know Charlie wouldn’t be there?
