CHARLIE KIRK MATTER IS A PSY-OP

Many people have been deeply unsettled by recent claims surrounding the reported assassination attempt on Charlie Kirk. A short clip featuring Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, has been circulating online this week. In it, she describes the event as a psychological operation, drawing a comparison to the Reichstag fire of 1933. Her remarks suggest that the narrative around Kirk is being shaped deliberately to provoke fear and justify authoritarian measures.

Fitts argues that this incident is not only a distraction, but a tool to erode civil liberties. According to her, rather than focusing on the specifics of what did or did not happen, attention should be directed toward the policy reactions that follow. She mentions statements by the Attorney General and the president, warning that these may be part of a coordinated attempt to impose stricter laws and weaken constitutional protections. Fitts emphasizes the importance of resisting these changes, particularly any encroachments on due process and free speech.

She further connects this moment to broader efforts by the current administration to establish what she calls a control grid. In her view, the urgency lies in recognizing how moments of crisis are used to consolidate power. Her call to action is directed toward those concerned with civil liberties, encouraging them not to be distracted or intimidated. Instead, she urges political pressure in more productive directions, such as supporting efforts by Representative Thomas Massie to force the release of the Epstein files.

Toward the end of her remarks, Fitts warns of a growing divide between the ultra-wealthy and the general population. She characterizes this moment as a power struggle in which legal norms are being openly undermined. Her message is not framed in the language of partisanship but as a broader concern about the future of law, liberty, and national integrity.

The comparison to the Reichstag fire is particularly stark. That event, as history records, led to a collapse of civil freedoms in Germany under the pretense of national security. Whether or not one accepts the parallel, Fitts appears to be asking her audience to stay alert to how fear and confusion can be weaponized politically. Her final appeal is simple: do not let these moments pass without resistance, because silence, even when well-intentioned, may signal permission.