Skip to main content

The Chain of Evil Map — A 13-Minute Walkthrough

What This Video Is​

Thirteen minutes thirty-three seconds — a screen recording of a large flow-chart diagram titled CHAIN OF EVIL, narrated by its author as he moves a cursor across it. The diagram credits itself in the top-left corner to @HolonCitizen, who is the author of this site; this is therefore this investigation's own hypothesis, presented in its own voice, not an outside source it is reporting.

The narrator says at the outset that the diagram was built on top of a post by Project Constitution, which he credits and links, and that his aim is to take that analysis "to the tenth degree" by rendering it as a map. He also states his purpose repeatedly: the map is a prelude to a series of proposed fixes he intends to publish, which is the Fix programme.

What it is not is evidence. A diagram is a structure of hypothesis. It shows what a mechanism would look like if it existed; it does not show that it does. That distinction is the frame for everything below.

What Is Said​

The framing analogy (about 01:00). The narrator argues that a foreign state shaping another country's institutions is often dismissed as impossible, and offers a comparison: American foreign aid programmes have been criticised for doing something structurally similar abroad using money. His claim is that the same shape of influence can be attempted with other instruments. That is an analogy, and he offers it as one.

Why the chart's bottom row is citizens (02:00 - 03:00). He argues that the traditional levers for shaping public opinion have weakened — cable news audiences have aged and shrunk, universities carry less authority than they did — and that influence therefore migrates toward the institutions still holding cohesive audiences, in his account, churches and youth organisations.

Charlie Kirk's trajectory (03:00 - 05:00). He describes Kirk as having moved, around 2023, from delivering approved narratives toward positions set by his own judgement, and attributes that shift partly to the "groyper" arguments of 2022 turning Kirk's own Socratic-questioning method back on him. He frames the later positions — on Gaza, on a possible war with Iran, on the Epstein material — as Kirk standing where he thought he should, and as the point at which, in the diagram's logic, risk rises.

The risk-to-others claim (05:00 - 06:30, and again near the end). He cites the account, given publicly by Candace Owens, that within about twenty-four hours of the assassination a TPUSA executive told her that she and Tucker Carlson should keep their heads down, and that it "was supposed to be you." That is Owens's public account, reported as hers. This site treats it as an attributed claim; it is examined on it was supposed to be you. He also refers to Marjorie Taylor Greene's stated reasons for leaving Congress. Neither reference is presented here as established fact about anyone's conduct.

The institutional capture hypothesis (06:30 - 10:00). The narrator's argument is that influencing church leaders one at a time is impractical, so a hypothesised actor would instead seek influence over an organisation that already aggregates them — and he points at TPUSA's scale, its chapters, its conference and its podcast. He notes as relevant the succession at the top of the organisation and a change of chief operating officer that he says occurred shortly before September 10. These are his inferences about what would be strategically attractive to a hypothetical actor. They are not claims that any named person did anything, and no such claim is made here. The documented material on the succession sits on the disputed CEO succession.

The closing argument (10:00 - 13:33). He argues the case should be read as a chain rather than as the act of a single actor, asks whether there is anything above any individual in that chain, and says the point of the exercise is to move from commentary to remedies that ordinary citizens can pursue.

What The Footage Shows​

A single static screen capture of the diagram for the full duration, with the narrator's cursor moving across it. The chart is colour-coded and organised in columns, and its structure is the argument:

  • Left columns — captured mainstream news and sellout influencers feeding a propaganda and narrative-control node; separately, a "take over TPUSA, control church leaders" node feeding TPUSA, then leadership groups, then controlled church leaders.
  • Centre — a "puppet masters" node pointing both to the TPUSA route and to a node labelled "assassination or risk of assassination," which connects to a row of public figures.
  • Right-centre — "Country X's foreign intel service" into intel methods, into loyalty to a foreign country, into the administration, into controlled FBI and CIA cover-up nodes.
  • Right — "Country Y's foreign intel service" into Jeffrey Epstein, into blackmail, into sellout members of Congress.
  • Far right — "Country Z's money" into lobbying, into the same members of Congress, funnelling into "evil laws."
  • Bottom — a wide band labelled citizens and Christians, as the population all of it acts upon.

Note the deliberate anonymisation: the intelligence services and funding sources are labelled Country X, Y and Z, not named. That is a choice worth respecting when the map is cited, and this page respects it.

How To Read It​

As a hypothesis diagram with testable branches. Its usefulness is that it makes the claim structure explicit enough to be attacked: each arrow is a proposition that either has documentation behind it or does not. Several branches do have real evidentiary threads elsewhere on this site — the halted foreign-nexus review, the donor disputes, the sealed material. Others are structural speculation about what an actor would find attractive, with no documentation attached at all. The map does not distinguish between the two, and a reader has to.

How It Connects​

Where This Video Also Appears​

← Back to Theories · All video evidence