‘CUT AND DRY’: Don Jr argues this made Robinson’s guilt ‘VERY CLEAR

Fox News alert. Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin, Tyler Robinson, is back in court. Today, we're finally getting to hear from Robinson's trans lover, Lance Twiggs. According to Twiggs, Robinson never talked about Charlie Kirk. Did you and he ever talk about politics? He did more than me. I didn't really, still don't really keep up with politics very much. He'd usually talk about stuff he heard on the radio. What about Charlie Kirk? Did he ever talk about Charlie Kirk? I personally had never heard him talk about Charlie Kirk before, specifically. Twiggs claims Robinson was a political hermit with a mild case of TDS. How about political issues? So did you ever talk about gender identity issues and LGBTQ rights? No, not really. Usually, if he did talk about politics stuff, it was relating to Trump or current policies being issued or voted on. So the gay guy in a trans relationship never talked about LGBT stuff or Charlie Kirk. That's weird, just like your boyfriend engraving bullets. Was he engraving bullets before this? Yeah, I don't remember exactly when, but he had said he was planning to go hunting with his family. And he asked me if we had a Dremel, because he said he wanted to create messages on bullets. And I just told him where Dremel was and told him to make sure he doesn't set off a bullet on accident in the house, but I didn't really think about it until then. And now, unsealed texts between Twiggs and Robinson reveal the very moment Robinson allegedly admitted that he murdered Kirk. Quote, you weren't the one who did it, right? I am, I'm sorry. I thought they caught the person. No, they grabbed some crazy old dude. Why? Why did I do it? Yeah, I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be negotiated out. If I am able to grab my rifle unseen, I will have left no evidence, end quote. The next day, Twiggs confronted Robinson about the texts. Did he talk about what he had done? Didn't go into detail. He just, I just asked him in person if what he said was true the night before, and he said it was. I started crying a little bit and said he wishes he hadn't done it. Prosecutors are revealing more evidence that links Robinson to Charlie Kirk's assassination. Investigators say they found the murder weapon wrapped in a towel in nearby woods, as well as a screwdriver on the roof of the building where Robinson allegedly took the shot. FBI analyst Amanda Baker says the DNA found on the towel and the tool came from two sources, Robinson and Twiggs. This all comes as new video was released showing Robinson limping on campus the day of the shooting. It's believed that Robinson's limb was because of the gun or possible gun parts hiding in his pants. This new video appears to debunk wild internet conspiracy theory that Robinson was never on the campus the day of the shooting. Now prosecutors have one day left to provide more evidence to convince the court that Tyler Robinson should be tried for Charlie Kirk's assassination. If the judge finds probable cause, the case moves toward a full criminal trial, which could end with the death penalty. Executive Vice President of the Trump organization Donald Trump Jr. joins us now. Thank you for joining us, Don. You were a longtime true friend of Charlie Kirk. In the ten months since his assassination, the internet has been flooded with people, many of whom claiming to be his friend, who have stirred up these conspiracy theories, everything from Tyler Robinson was never on campus, to Tyler Robinson never turned himself in, to suddenly becoming like ballistics experts about the Springfield 30-06 round. You were in the hearing this week. Tell us what you learned about what happened on September 10th, 2025 at Utah State University. Well, listen, Charlie, having been in the room now, and I've been pretty quiet for most of this time. I did a lot of press right after Charlie was killed because Erica, the family, Turning Point asked me to do that. Everyone else sort of started jumping on the bandwagon. I wasn't gonna do any of it, but they wanted people who were actually his friends, not just people looking for the sort of clicks to do that. And then I went pretty quiet because, honestly, there was so much noise out there. You didn't really realize what was or what wasn't. I mean, there were so many things that were, as far as people were concerned, were the gospel that, strangely enough, haven't even been brought up in the case, probably because they weren't. And so I stayed silent because I want actual justice for Charlie. The way to honor his legacy is to actually find who did this. And honestly, based on everything that I saw in that courtroom, it's very clear to me that Tyler Robinson did this. I mean, you have a kid that drove four and a half hours away from where he lived to visit a university campus that he did not go to. He visited the campus four times. You can see that very clearly on the video. One of those times, you know, at 1230 at night, you see him change clothes from, you know, wearing shorts and a T-shirt to wearing long pants and baggy things going up to a rooftop where they showed us literal pictures of indentations where, you know, someone would be lying down prone to shoot a rifle. You have a screwdriver that likely could have been used to take apart the gun because it had the DNA of the shooter and, you know, and his boyfriend on it, but mostly Tyler Robinson. And so it's pretty clear to me that, A, he was there, he was scoping it out. He then went back, put on clothes that could perhaps hide a rifle or a taken down rifle if you took the stock, you know, and the, you know, barreled action apart. You could conceal that in your pants much more easily. He's walking with this strange limp. And then the second the shot's fired, they see him, you know, jumping off the roof. The limp is gone and he's holding a long, dark object, you know, like a rifle wrapped up in something. You know, between that, the DNA evidence, the fact that, you know, minor details, like he turned himself in, and I believe his parents identified him in the video. You know, to me, it puts so much of this at rest. Then more importantly, listening to the defense essentially tried to eliminate any kind of evidence to go in there. I mean, it's almost like, well, that would be really prejudicial. It's like, yeah, because you have him on video doing exactly what everyone believes him to have done. Yeah, that's prejudicial because it's very clear to me that he is guilty. And so, you know, I wanted to be quiet for a long time, and I was because I wanted to see what actually happened. And I don't think anyone, you know, can't say that I don't have my conspiracy theory bona fides out there. I've seen plenty of them. I've, you know, been, you know, a victim of many of them. I've seen that. But because of this, because of the gravity, I wanted to see what actually was there, what the actual evidence. And to me, this stuff is is very cut and dry at this point. So are there any big questions that you went into the into this preliminary hearing with that prosecutors were not able to answer? Well, listen, I think the prosecutors did a great job doing that. I mean, frankly, the biggest question in my mind at this point, Charlie, is not whether Tyler Robinson did this or if it was, you know, some of the, you know, people from a foreign land or another planet. It was why were there only six police officers active at a major event on a university campus? I mean, that to me seems like something that should have been done. Apparently from, you know, the officer that was testifying seemed quite competent as an officer, very competent as a witness. But the fact that there were only six people there, that there was no briefing prior to an event, I mean, these are big events, you know, I've done. Right. I've done a hundred with Charlie Kirk on college campuses all over the place. These are big events that draw thousands of people, you know, that there wasn't an all hands on deck kind of operation to prevent this very thing from happening is truly scary. You then get into the details of, you know, this guy and his views, you know, on transgenderism and what that meant relative to Charlie's views. And you start saying, I mean, it's about as clear cut as it can get to me. I almost hate to ask the question, but I think it's really important because I don't want to give any attention to these people who all they want is attention. Why do you think so many of these people are spinning these baseless theories online about Charlie Kirk's murder? Well, I think there's different things, I mean, you know, there's people that, you know, frankly, you know, and perhaps in some cases, rightfully so, feel like they've been misled for a long time about a lot of things that turns out they were right. I mean, I was canceled for saying, hey, guys, like the Wuhan lab leak probably came from the lab that studied the exact virus in question at the ground zero of where the virus broke out. No, no, no, Don, you're not a virologist. How dare you opine on something that's like you don't have to be a virologist, you just have to be not an imbecile. So, you know, you have those and then you have other people that I imagine are doing it for clicks and, you know, they've either tried to monetize this or otherwise. So, you know, I'm not going to give credence to their way. I know many people, frankly, on both sides of that, you know, it's, you know, the movement, you know, I think it's it's really coming together now that, you know, before six months ago, it would have been probably 50 50. Now it's probably a 90 10 issue where people are saying, OK, this is very clearly what happened, you know, but I but I understand a lot of people why they'd be skeptical about anything that they've been told as of late. But for me, as someone who is a big skeptic on a lot of things, who's called it out for a long period of time, you know, I was there. I don't believe that literally every officer is in on this. I don't believe that, you know, my lying eyes were telling me the video was different. I don't believe someone would turn themselves in and their parents would bring them there if they weren't a part of it. And you back that up with the other evidence of, you know, that person's, you know, both religious and political views, you know, his views on transgenderism and the violence that we've seen from so many people affiliated with that community over the last few years. You know, again, it became very cut and dry to me. And, you know, again, the stuff I saw, the videos I saw, the evidence I saw, that's not stuff that's been in the public domain. And I think that was difficult for a lot of people to use so much noise. It's hard to tell what is fact, what is fiction. In court, we saw the facts laid out very eloquently. It took a long period of time to get it out there. But once you see it, you put the picture together. Let's just say this is to me, again, way beyond a reasonable doubt. Well, it's because you are a skeptic that you have a lot of credibility on this and we appreciate you taking an honest look at it and we appreciate you coming on and explaining to us. Thank you, Don. My pleasure, Charlie. Thank you.