Joe Kent, the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, has ignited a firestorm on the right by suggesting that Israelis may have been behind the assassination of conservative leader Charlie Kirk.
According to Western Journal, Kent a retired U.S. Army Special Forces combat veteran who resigned his post on Tuesday advanced the explosive theory during a conversation with Tucker Carlson, aligning himself with a narrative that has been aggressively promoted by podcast host Candace Owens since Kirks murder at Utah Valley University in September. Owens has repeatedly rejected the straightforward account offered by law enforcement, refusing to accept that the man charged with the crime, Tyler Robinson, acted alone, despite text messages Robinson allegedly sent to his self-described transgender lover, released by Utah authorities, in which he indicated he shot Kirk because of the conservative activists views.
On her podcast and in posts on X, Owens has floated a rotating cast of culprits, insisting that Robinson is merely a pawn in a larger plot. She has speculated that Kirks assassination was an inside job orchestrated by individuals within Turning Point USA, or alternatively the handiwork of the Israeli Mossad, the French government, or even the U.S. military, according to the New York Post.
Kents foray into this conspiratorial territory comes on the heels of his abrupt resignation as head of the National Counterterrorism Center, a move he justified by claiming he did not believe Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States. That position mirrors a familiar Democratic talking point since the latest round of conflict with Tehran began, and Kent went further by asserting that President Donald Trumps decision to strike Iran was driven by pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.
Trump, for his part, has publicly rejected the notion that he was manipulated by Jerusalem into confrontation with Tehran. He told reporters earlier this month that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not drag him into war with Iran and suggested that, if anything, the dynamic ran in the opposite direction.
Netanyahu himself pushed back forcefully against the idea that he or his government could strong-arm Trump into anything. Does anyone really think that someone can tell President Trump what to do? the Israeli leader asked on Thursday, underscoring the presidents well-known independence and unwillingness to be led by foreign capitals.
In a podcast episode released Wednesday, Kent told Carlson that Kirk had been a key voice inside Trumps orbit arguing against escalation with Iran. Charlie Kirk was one of President Trumps closest advisors, and he also advocated heavily against a war with Iran, Kent said, framing Kirks foreign-policy views as central to understanding his death.
Kent went on to recount a personal interaction with Kirk that he now portrays as ominous in hindsight. He was in the Oval Office in the lead-up to the 12-Day War. I wasnt particularly close with Charlie. He was very gracious to me when I was running for Congress, very, very supportive, so we knew each other. And the last time I saw Charlie Kirk on this earth was in June in the West Wing in the stairway, and I said hi to him, and he looked me in the eye, and said very loudly Joe, stop us from getting into a war with Iran, Kent recalled.
From that anecdote, Kent extrapolated a broader theory about Israeli motives and capabilities. He argued that Israel knew further operations would be required against Iran beyond last summers Midnight Hammer strike on the regimes nuclear program and implied that Kirks opposition to war placed him in the crosshairs.
So when one of President Trumps closest advisers, who is vocally advocating for us to not go to war with Iran and for us to rethink, at least, our relationship with the Israelis, and then hes suddenly and publicly assassinated, and were not allowed to ask any questions about that, its a data point. Its a data point that we need to look into, Kent said, presenting speculation as a kind of investigative breadcrumb.
The Army veteran then suggested that the official narrative about Robinson as a lone gunman may be incomplete, even as he conceded it could ultimately prove accurate. Weve been told this individual, Robinson, is a lone gunman, and maybe he is, but the investigation that I was a part of, the National Counterterrorism Center was a part of, we were stopped from continuing to investigate, he claimed, implying that federal authorities were blocked from exploring potential foreign links.
Carlson pressed Kent on why he believed his team had been ordered to stand down on any deeper probe into possible international connections to Kirks killing. Kent responded that the Department of Justice and the FBI would likely argue that the matter properly belongs with Utah prosecutors handling the case against Robinson, but he insisted that more could have been done at the federal level without interfering in the states criminal proceedings.
Adding context from within the conservative movement, talk radio host Steve Deace confirmed in a Wednesday social media post that Kirk did indeed harbor serious concerns about U.S. entanglement in a broader conflict with Iran. On the night of Operation Midnight Hammer, Charlie also texted me how concerned he was about a spillover effect and his opposition to a regime change war in Iran. That is true, Deace recounted, validating Kents description of Kirks anti-war stance while stopping far short of endorsing any Israeli-assassination theory.
Deace then drew a sharp line between legitimate policy disagreement and unfounded accusations of foreign murder plots. Charlie thought Islam was not compatible with Western Civilization. Yet no one is claiming he was really killed by Islamists. Charlie didnt want open borders, yet no one is claiming he was really killed by the Cartels. Charlie really didnt like RINOs like John Cornyn, but no one is claiming he was really killed by the establishment, Deace wrote, underscoring the selective and obsessive nature of the anti-Israel conjecture.
He concluded with a pointed critique of those who insist on connecting Kirks death to Israel while ignoring every other possible ideological adversary. There were quite a few things Charlie was opposed to, and yet isnt it odd and strange these imaginary dots are only connected where Israel is concerned. Odd and strange indeed. Im sure that doesnt reveal anything like true motivations whatsoever. Of course not. Just an odd and strange coincidence, Deace added, clearly suggesting that animus toward Jews and the Jewish state is driving much of the speculation.
Conservative influencer Karys Rhea, speaking on Israel-based journalist Brian Schraugers podcast, placed the latest round of blame the Jews rhetoric in a much older and darker historical pattern. Once you embrace conspiratorialism as a worldview, instead of keeping two feet on the ground, she said, you always get to anti-Semitism, because anti-Semitism has always been fundamentally a conspiracy theory.
Rhea elaborated that anti-Semitism assigns Jews undue power and influence and blames a secret cabal of global Jewry for all the worlds problems. Her comments serve as a warning to the right that, in the name of skepticism toward foreign entanglements and the national-security establishment, some are drifting into territory long occupied by fringe cranks and bigots.
Kent, by echoing Owens insinuations and elevating conjecture about Israeli involvement in Kirks murder, appears to have stepped onto that same anti-Semitic conspiracy bandwagon, one that is not grounded in verifiable evidence but in suspicion of Americas closest Middle Eastern ally. For conservatives who value truth, moral clarity, and a strong but prudent foreign policy, the challenge now is to distinguish between healthy debate over war and peace and the age-old temptation to scapegoat Jews whenever tragedy strikes.
Login