The committee had subpoenaed people and documents to a series of hearings, but Kirk’s attorneys had sworn he had no access to any of his messages on any platform (WhatsApp, Google, Telegram, etc) covering the period after the 2020 election. Fortunately, others had provided messages that Kirk - or someone with his name - had sent to them. So, we know pretty well what happened and money was at the bottom of it.
Kirk received a message on 15 December 2020, from a contact, Caroline Wren, asking him to speak to Julie Francelli, heiress to a fortune from a supermarket chain known as Publix, and a well-known Republican donor. Trump had lost the election the previous month to Joe Biden but was refusing to accept the result.
Kirk tries to call Ms Francelli but doesn’t manage to speak to her. By 23 December, he’s texting Caroline Wren asking: “Did your friend give us money?”
On Boxing Day, three days later, Wren and Francelli meet. Francelli wants to know what TPUSA has planned for January 6th, and Wren texts Kirk to find out. He replies that his organisation has nothing planned. Wren then says Francelli is prepared to give $1.25 million and wants to know how TPUSA would spend it.
He replies:
"An investment of $1,250,000 for TPA will allow us to deploy social media influencers to Washington, D.C., on Jan 6th, produce high-quality capturing video content that will 10 educate millions about the significance of Jan 6th, mobilize students to fight against voter fraud, as well help expand Turning Point Action's campus army towards the President's America first goals/objectives."
It's quite obvious from the exchange that he only decided to be involved in supporting January 6th once it was clear that Ms. Fancelli was going to provide a substantial donation. Suddenly, the next day (27th) Kirk was in full 'Stop the Steal' protest mode. It wasn’t as if he planned something and then went after the funding. The funding came first, and with it the prospect of adding to his wealth.
There follows a series of messages where Ms Francelli or her employees ask for a breakdown of costs and how the money would be spent. A spreadsheet is provided showing $975,000, including $250,000 for buses and promotion. TPUSA begins to organise things, and it seems the money was then transferred from Ms Francelli's account.
On 4 January, he asks Ms Francelli for another $250,000, and she arranges it with her accountant:
"I need to send $250,000 to Charlie Kirk ASAP," Ms Francelli wrote, adding that the extra money is for "busing in more people." Kirk put out a tweet (since deleted) on the same day that TPUSA is sending 80 buses to Washington on January 5th.
However, the committee notes that the budget Ms Wren had given to Kirk for the spending of a million dollars "already included $250,000 associated with busing and promotion." They went through all the invoices and couldn't find anything like $250,000 actually incurred by TPUSA for buses. Kirk is then asked:
"So can you help us understand why there would have been a need for an additional $250,000 on top of the million dollars that was already provided by Ms. Fancelli?"
It also looks to me as if he was creaming off, or trying to cream off, $250,000 or more for himself or his organisation by falsely claiming for buses twice and then only sending a fraction of the 80 he had pledged. I don't believe he ever genuinely believed the 2020 election was stolen.
Kirk did not support the rioting and was criticised by some of his followers for suggesting that there was, "a legitimate argument that President Trump incited the mess at the Capitol?" to which Kirk replies: "It is the honest thing to say."
He also texted that Trump, "could have been more specific and calm in the way he handled the speech."
He later withdrew from Trump’s 1776 advisory commission, a body established in September 2020 by the then still US President to support what he called "patriotic education".
So, it’s not impossible that Kirk wasn’t quite what he seemed. I think it’s possible that he didn't believe most of the outrageous things he said publicly, but he was just very greedy, had become accustomed to a substantial income, and didn't want to see it reduced.
The public debates he was known for were never real debates anyway. They were performances with him shouting over his opponents and plucking 'facts' out of the air. They seemed designed to fire-up his supporters on his YouTube channel and keep the advertising revenue flowing in.
Kirk isn’t alone. We know that Tucker Carlson, before he was fired by Fox News, told colleagues he hated Trump while going on air nightly amplifying and repeating all the propaganda, misinformation and lies that came from the Trump camp. Again, the answer must be money. Why else would you do it?
Fox News and Rupert Murdoch have made a fortune from stirring up unrest. The Daily Mail in this country has done the same. And there are plenty of podcasters (on both sides of the divide) who derive million-dollar incomes from what is essentially anger and hate.
It’s worth saying that the cost of buses wasn’t the only topic Kirk was questioned about, but it was an important one and I think it reveals how it all works. You rip off donors in order to gull your supporters into believing a lot of lies, while you sit in the middle raking in a fortune,
