[Addendum October 10, 2021: As you know, the assassination famously took place on the Ides of March, March 15. Why? We are told it is because the conspirators found it to be an auspicious date. However, we now have a different explanation, given to us by the Dido/Anna story above. Anna became Anna Perenna, who became a favorite deity of the Romans. Her festival was held in her grove on the first mile marker of the Via Flaminia, on the first full Moon of the year. And when was that? Well, according to the old Roman calendar that was. . . the Ides of March. So the date is pointing back to Anna, “sister” of Dido, who just happened to be the ancestor of Caesar in direct line. Anna/Dido faked her death in both stories, so the writers of the Caesar script thought it would be clever to fake his death on that date.]
More indication the assassination was faked is the way it is still sold by mainstream (Phoenician) historians. At Wikipedia, on the page for Caesar's assassination, they have a section on the three causes of it. This is the first section on the page. But it is ludicrously weak and makes no sense. 1) Caesar allegedly failed to rise for senators visiting him. So what? The senate had long since been bypassed and everyone knew that. Caesar could have gotten up and farted in the face of each senator one by one, and it wouldn't have made any conceivable difference. 2) Two tribunes allegedly removed a wreath from a statue of Caesar, and he deposed them for it. Again, so what? Caesar had been doing much worse things for years, including banishing and killing people, so again this just looks like a
poorly manufactured story. 3) At Lupercalia Antony placed a diadem on Caesar's head, and Caesar removed it. We are told Caesar was testing his popularity, to see if he could crown himself king. But he was already dictator for life, and held all power. So what he called himself was beside the point. Just a few years later the Emperors were calling themselves gods, and no one took offense, least of all the Senate. So the fact that historians have always been trying so hard to sell this assassination is indication it is fake. If it was real, the real story would suffice. The truth sells itself and does not need manufactured fairy tales to embellish it.
The next section at Wikipedia is even worse, though again it sticks pretty close to written history. We are told there were around 60 conspirators, and that they even considered propositioning Antony. Really? We are told Trebonius had already approached Antony a few months earlier, but Antony declined. That makes no sense. Antony was Caesar's second in command. Approaching him to be in the conspiracy would have been the stupidest thing imaginable, since it would have gotten immediately back to Caesar.
But the biggest problem is the one we have seen many times before, from Abe Lincoln to Bobby Kennedy to Olof Palme: lack of a guard. We are supposed to believe a few middle aged senators with knives would be able to bypass Caesar's guard, made of trained soldiers. You are supposed to believe Caesar was walking around by himself, with no other protection than a toga, but that is ridiculous. Things didn't work that way, not in 1986, not in 1968, not in 1865, and not in 44BC.