TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @EvanAKilgore
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY SH*T: Rep. Jayapal just asked Epstein survivors at the DOJ oversight hearing to raise their hand if Trump's DOJ has not met with them. Every single victim raised their hand. Pam Bondi has failed the American people and must resign immediately. This is bad. https://t.co/c9THybpsxI
Video Transcript AI Summary
Survivors in the room stood and raised their hands to indicate they have not yet met with the Department of Justice. The Congresswoman urges Attorney General Bondi to apologize to the survivors for the DOJ’s handling of the Epstein files, calling the release of the Epstein files and their information “absolutely unacceptable.” She asks Bondi to turn to the survivors and apologize, stating this is about Bondi taking responsibility for the Department of Justice and the harm it has caused.
The exchange continues with the Congresswoman insisting that Merrick Garland has sat in that chair twice, and she questions whether Bondi will respond to the survivors, not to those who predated Bondi. The Congresswoman reiterates, “This is not about anybody that came before you. It is about you taking responsibility for your Department of Justice and the harm that it has done to the survivors who are standing right behind you and are waiting for you to turn to them and apologize for what your Department of Justice is.”
The hearing appears to encounter procedural friction. The Congresswoman complains that the question is not being answered as expected, accusing the proceedings of theatrics, while another member clarifies that witnesses answer in the way they choose. The chair and other members intervene to maintain “regular order.”
The Congresswoman asserts that the situation represents “a massive cover up,” accusing then-President Donald Trump of making the release of the Epstein files a center of his political campaign because he thought it would benefit him. She claims that Bondi’s office claimed to have a client list, but says there was no list, and alleges that Deputy Todd Blanche met alone with Elaine Maxwell and “transferred her to a minimum security prison.”
She insists that Bondi should turn to the survivors who are standing behind him on a human level. The chair interrupts and remarks that time has been delayed, noting that the gentlewoman has time remaining but the session ends with a reflection that the general has done something, though the exact action is not specified in the excerpt. The session ends with an acknowledgment of the time constraints and appreciation for the discussion.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: To the survivors in the room, if you are willing, please stand. And if you are willing, please raise your hands if you have still not been able to meet with this Department of Justice. Please know for the record that every single survivor has raised their hand. Attorney General Bondi, you apologize to the survivors in your opening statement for what they went through at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein. Will you turn to them now and apologize for what your Department of Justice has put them through with the absolutely unacceptable release of the Epstein files and their information.
Speaker 1: Congresswoman, you set before Merrick Garland sat in this chair twice. Attorney General I'm Bonnie gonna finish my answer?
Speaker 0: No, I'm gonna reclaim my time because I asked Attorney you General, specific yes question that I would like to answer, which is will you turn to the survivors? This is not about anybody that came came before you. It is about you taking responsibility for your Department of Justice and the harm that it has done to the survivors who are standing right behind you and are waiting for you to turn to them and apologize for what your Department of Justice is.
Speaker 2: Members members get to ask the questions the witness get to answer in the way they wanna answer the attorney general That's
Speaker 0: not accurate, mister chairman.
Speaker 1: Because she doesn't like the answer. So Mr.
Speaker 0: Chairman
Speaker 1: Why? Have asked Didn't she ask Merrick Garland this twice? I'm reclaiming my time. And when
Speaker 0: I will continue to to answer
Speaker 2: Mr. Chairman, the gentleman lady is
Speaker 1: reclaiming I'm not gonna your get in the gutter for her theatrics.
Speaker 2: Gentlelady. The time belongs to The gentlelady has seventeen seconds.
Speaker 0: Thank you. You're not gonna answer this question, so let me just Chairman, I'll direct it to you.
Speaker 1: What a massive No, I'm answering a question.
Speaker 2: Chairman, will you restore her time? The witnesses I'm interrupt in
Speaker 1: gonna get her with this woman.
Speaker 0: Stop the time. She's doing theatrics. Let me have my The
Speaker 2: gentle lady the gentle lady from Washington controls the time. The gentle lady has seventeen seconds. You can you can proceed with your final seventeen seconds.
Speaker 0: What a massive cover up this has been and continues to be. Donald Trump made the release of the Epstein files center of his political campaign because he thought it would benefit him. Then you got into office, attorney general, claimed to have a client list
Speaker 2: Regular order.
Speaker 0: Say that there was no list. Deputy, Todd Blanche, met alone with Elaine Maxwell and
Speaker 2: transferred her
Speaker 0: to a minimum security prison. And now you continue the cover up
Speaker 1: the ten eleven I
Speaker 0: wish fired. You would turn around to the survivors who are standing right behind you and on
Speaker 1: a human level. Chairman, recognizes
Speaker 0: the general you have done.
Speaker 2: Time is time is delayed. The general lady, you have no time to yield back. Yeah. I appreciate that. We appreciate the thought.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY CRAP: A young man at @TPUSA's America Fest just asked Ben Shapiro about Israel's attack on the U.S.S. Liberty. The Israel questions are not going to stop, for the record. https://t.co/5B2l1cxP0M
Video Transcript AI Summary
In the exchange, the interviewer raises the question of why Ben labeled the 1967 USS Liberty attack as irrelevant to current Israeli-American relations, given that dozens of American servicemen were killed or wounded. Ben responds that focusing on a mistaken attack from 1967, and using it to define today’s Israel-U.S. relations, is irrelevant in the context of modern relations—comparing it to citing World War II or 1776 to define present ties with Britain or Germany. He acknowledges the attack was horrible and tragic for those involved, notes that the Israeli government paid reparations, and asserts that the actual naval record shows it was a mistaken attack.
The interviewer presses for accountability, noting that the American flag was flying on the USS Liberty, which would seem to preclude misidentification. Ben reiterates the broader context: people who cite the Liberty often are not discussing the specifics of the incident, but are using it to suggest that Israel deliberately attacked an American ship to harm the United States. He questions whether that is the interviewer’s point and emphasizes a broader agenda.
The interviewer insists on accountability and asks why the incident should be irrelevant to today’s relations. Ben maintains that the issue is not central to assessing current U.S.-Israel relations, arguing that the attack should be considered within its own time, and that today’s relations are shaped by a wide range of factors. He notes that there were multiple naval investigations, and that the Navy records show the Liberty was off its usual path, and that at the time, Israeli forces mistook it for an Egyptian ship while Mirage aircraft were deployed by the Israeli military. In the initial attack, the American flag was knocked down, and the assault continued for about ninety minutes; once the pilots realized it was an American ship, they reportedly called off the attack and sent a ship to assist the USS Liberty.
The interviewer acknowledges that there have been various incidents and persistent concerns, but maintains that the question concerns American interests. Ben maintains his position that the broader agenda is central to the line of questioning, and questions the relevance of a six-decade-old attack as the number one issue in assessing current U.S.-Israel relations. The interviewer suggests that the audience includes people alive at the time, implying lasting relevance, while Ben calls for focusing on current relations rather than an old incident, noting the existence of a wide variety of historical contexts in 1967. The conversation ends with Ben indicating he will move to another point, signaling the interviewer is not addressing his core question.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thank you for being here, Ben. You cited during your speech truth as the most important tenet of American conservatism. Why therefore did you call irrelevant the Israeli attack in 1967 on the USS Liberty with left dozens of American servicemen dead and hundreds wounded?
Speaker 1: So what I actually said is that if we're looking at modern Israeli American relations, looking at an attack that happened mistakenly by multiple navy reports, multiple Israeli reports, and all available evidence, and using that attack in order to undermine today's relations between Israel and America, that's irrelevant. As irrelevant as it would be to cite a piece of evidence from World War two or from 1776 to define America's relations with, for example, Great Britain or Germany today. That does not mean that the attack wasn't horrible for the Americans involved, that it wasn't bloody and terrible. The Israeli government paid reparations to the people who were killed. If you look at the actual military record of what happened on the USS Liberty, it was clearly a mistaken and tragic attack.
The people who frequently cite the USS Liberty, however, are not talking about the specifics of the USS Liberty. I suspect that the vast majority of people who bring this up are doing so in order to suggest that Israel deliberately attacked an American ship because Israel deliberately wants to harm America. It's connected generally with a larger point. I wonder if that's your point.
Speaker 0: If the truth matters, then the Israeli government must be held accountable for that attack. The American flag was flying on that ship. You do not mistake an American ship for a foreign one when our flag is flying. So
Speaker 1: and we can spend the rest of the time talking about the specifics of the US liberty attack or you can actually go look at the naval investigations that were done, multiple naval investigations that were The reality is that people were flying mirage planes for the Israeli military at the time. The USS Liberty was sailing in an area where it had essentially gone off grid. The Israeli military mistook it for an Egyptian ship. They thought it was shelling Al Arish, which happened not to be true. In the initial attack, the American flag was knocked down, and then the attack went on for about ninety minutes.
And then as soon you can hear this, by the way, on the tapes of the Israeli pilots talking to each other. As soon as they realize that it's an American ship, they call off the attack. They speed a ship to try and help the USS Liberty. There have been multiple unfortunate friendly fire incidents between allied forces, including, for example, in the Gulf War where US forces were responsible for killing about nine British troops during the Gulf War. It's an unfortunate reality of war, but you're not answering my question which is what is your broader agenda in asking the question because I suspect that your question is not limited to your specific ire over an incident that happened in 1967.
Speaker 0: I think we should question any foreign country's relationship with our government. That's totally fine, but I'm just wondering why it would serve American interests.
Speaker 1: Again, that I'm I'm perfectly fine with questioning any country's relationship with The United States. But, again, I'm wondering what your motivation is in bringing up a six decade old attack as though it is the number one issue in assessing the relationship between Israel and The United States today.
Speaker 0: Well, many problems persist to this day, but it's interesting that you say six decade old incident when there are many people in this audience who are alive for that attack as if this is something that's irrelevant.
Speaker 1: Well, no. It's just not particularly relevant to assessing the relationship between The United States and Israel today in the same way that in 1967, there are a wide variety of countries with which The United States had different relations. Okay. It's it's clear you're not going to actually answer the question, so I'm happy to move to this one.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
BREAKING: Candace Owens just said she will STOP her investigation and questions into Charlie Kirk and @TPUSA if Erika Kirk tells her what she "is lying about." She then reviews a list of "verified lies" that TPUSA and the FBI have allegedly told. https://t.co/IwSR7Q2xft
Video Transcript AI Summary
Candace Owens is described as a former friend of Charlie and at one time an employee of Turning Point, accused of peddling conspiracies and “building her business off of these lies,” with the assertion that she is making “a huge amount of money” from them. The speaker’s response to Candace Owens and others spreading these lies is simply: “Stop.”
The conversation then shifts to a revelation that the interview was prerecorded, with sources from CBS News and audience members who say they had to do multiple takes because Barry wanted to read a prompter and questions were pre-submitted.
In addressing the question, the speaker asserts that the podcaster Candace Owens and others are “lying,” and that “All of the money. Millions upon millions of dollars” have been earned by some people, while others did not benefit as claimed. The speaker argues that Candace Owens implies that building a business from podcasting results in immediate wealth, but claims the speaker “already had this business” and was “already at top of the chart.”
Eric responds, and the speaker’s response to what to say to Candace Owens who is lying is “stop,” with a request for Erica to be explicit about what was lied about. The speaker claims to have reviewed lists and cannot find the lie, asserting that “The lies that I find are coming out of Turning Point USA.” Examples cited as lies from Turning Point USA include Mikey’s blood on him, Mikey’s dad being confused, and Rob McCoy’s statements about his father, which the speaker says Rob McCoy was confused about. The speaker also says Mikey’s departure as a hero does not feel honest, and alleges Charlie’s claim that he stopped a 30-06 bullet due to healthy eating and strong bones was a modern-day Christian miracle and a lie. The speaker asserts Charlie never wavered in his support for Israel, calling that a “nasty lie,” and accuses Turning Point USA of lying about Charlie’s life in the last weeks. The speaker also mentions claims that Barry won something, and questions whether Charlie’s evangelical commitment and preference for Catholic architecture were misrepresented as lies.
The speaker notes further that Turning Point USA lied about various other points, including a supposed “blood bad blood” between Ben Chifferro and others, and Terrell Farnsworth being told to remove an SD card by police, stating that Terrell Farnsworth personally told the speaker that was not true. The speaker claims Terrell removed the SD cards because hats were being stolen, not because of other thefts, and questions the logic of taking the cameras instead of just the SD card, especially the camera behind Terrell’s head.
Additional alleged lies include Charlie establishing a Doge, which is claimed not to have existed, and prior to Elon Musk’s government-accountability remark, that Charlie Christine flew drones—described as a major lie by Brian Harpold, who also allegedly stated that security had communicated with UB police to secure rooftops, which the speaker calls a lie. The speaker asks what they lied about, acknowledging mistakes but insisting they have not found a lie, and asks why there isn’t the same energy about lies from the feds, who allegedly told lies as well. The speaker references missing footage of Tyler Robinson turning himself in, unresolved questions about Egyptian planes, and years of tracking Charlie and Erika, with others laughing at these points. The speaker asks explicitly what they lied about and requests clarity, noting possible time-zone mistakes and a timeline discrepancy, and asking where the speaker is lying.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Candace Owens. Okay? At one time, a friend of Charlie's. At one time, an employee of Turning Point. She has been one of the main peddlers of these conspiracies, and she is making a huge amount of money on it.
She is building her business off of these lies. What do you want to say to her and the other people that are putting these lies out into the world right now? Stop. That's it. That's all I have to say.
Stop.
Speaker 1: So this is just to me. I'm gonna also let you know they prerecorded this. Obviously, I told you this yesterday from about 11:00 4PM. I have sources just everywhere, CBS News, the people that were in the audience I showed you were emailing me and they had to do multiple takes because Barry wanted to read a prompter. These questions were pre submitted, okay?
And I would like to respond to this loaded question. What would you like to say? The podcaster Candace Owens, am I even gonna address this repeat talking point about people making money except for the people that have actually made awful all of the money. All of the money. Millions upon millions of dollars.
But they're this is the new thing. It's like if you keep doing what you're already doing in podcasting or keep doing what you're already doing and doing ballistics on YouTube, if you catch a bunch of views, they wanna convince you that, like, you wake up and you turn into a millionaire. Building her business, what are you talking about? I already had this business. I was already at top of the chart.
Okay. I said I wasn't gonna talk about it. I actually did because it's it's so ridiculous. Okay? But she says, I'm lying.
And Eric responds, and her answer to what do you want to say to the podcaster Candace Owens who is lying is stop. So Erica would like me to stop lying, and I would like to honor that. Okay? I can only honor that if Erica is more explicit in terms of what I have lied about. What did I lie about?
It's just incredible. There have this opportunity. The questions have been performed. You could just start going through them. Maybe they will.
By the way, it's coming on Saturday. Maybe I've made a mistake somewhere, and I want to correct that. Right? I'm not interested. My goal is not to tell lies.
It is obviously plausible that I have made mistakes. I've reviewed these lists that we've put together and I can't find the lie. Okay? The lies that I find are coming out of Turning Point USA. Okay.
And are some of those lies. You know, Mikey had blood all over him. Okay. Mikey has offered that his dad was confused. I'll accept that.
Well, I didn't lie about that. Rob McCoy lied. He his father also said he called his father first. Maybe Rob McCoy was confused. Mikey being a hero for walking away doesn't feel honest.
Charlie's neck stopping a 30 ot six bullet because he ate healthy and had strong bones. It was a modern day Christian miracle. That feels like a pretty big lie. Okay? Charlie never wavered in his support for Israel was a nasty lie.
Maybe Barry won a what do you wanna say to people that literally lied about what Charlie was living through in the last weeks of his life? Stop, Josh Hammer. Stop Ebenezer and Yahoo. No. No.
I'm sorry. Barry Barry Weiss is here. We're not gonna get to that. Charlie was a committed evangelical who only liked Catholic architecture. Did I lie about that?
Nope. Turning Point USA lied about that, and I was attacked for telling me I I'm attacked for catching the lies. We'll get to that later. That's their new method. Once I was they first first, they accuse me of lying, then I prove I'm not lying, and then their strategy is to attack attack me for telling the truth and saying, how dare you reveal a personal text message to defend yourself from being called liar?
We can keep going here. Has any of this been clarified? Ben Chifferro said they never had any blood bad blood between them. I proved that that was not true. Again, that also came from a little PR, Alex Clark pulling that move.
Next page, Terrell Farnsworth was told to remove that SD card by police. That was not true. Terrell Farnsworth personally told me that that was not true. Terrell removed the SD cards because people were stealing hats. Again, not what Terrell Farnsworth himself told me.
And also doesn't make any logical sense because if you're worried about theft, you would have taken the cameras and not just the SD card, particularly from the camera behind his head as opposed to cameras that were in front of him. Lie. Charlie established a Doge, it was not unusual. That's a lie. It wasn't usual.
Doge didn't exist. Prior to Elon Musk making that thing about government accountability, Charlie Christine did not fly drones, major lie. Brian Harpold told that lie. Brian Harpold also told a major lie when he said that the security had communicated with UB police to secure those rooftops. Was a lie.
It was actually a walkway behind. What am I getting here? What what have I done here in this presentation that I lied about? Wasn't Have I made mistakes along the way? Yes.
I'm not perfect. And I will always adjust those mistakes. So I'm asking you to tell me what I lied about. Why is there not this same energy also for the feds? Because they've told some lies.
We've a list of those two. We put that together. We would like some clarity. Again, police. Those two ideas seem to be running into each other.
How can both of these things be true? Do you wanna die or not? Would I? Maybe there's an explanation. It's definitely odd.
And the footage mysteriously missing of Tyler Robinson turning himself in. And then, of course, there's just things that we can't get answers to, which is the Egyptian planes. Tracking Charlie, following Erika throughout years. Instead, they're laughing at these things. So what am I lying about?
Explicitly lying about. Not made a molecular or a minor mistake. We got a time zone wrong. And then it's like, she lied. The plane leapt a couple of hours earlier.
Maybe somewhere I made a mistake on a timeline of Charlie being here on this day when he's actually there on that day. But I'm talking, like, where am I lying? Because, like, I I would like to stop if you can tell me.
reSee.it AI Summary
I report that TPUSA spokesman Andrew Kolvet clarifies Mikey McCoy’s behavior after Charlie Kirk was shot. Kolvet says Mikey covered his ears, was “so shell shocked,” then turned around to call Erika Kirk and Rob McCoy as Charlie had instructed. In chaotic, terrifying moments, reactions vary. Do you think this satisfies concerns?
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
UPDATE: TPUSA spokesman, Andrew Kolvet, attempts to clarify Mikey McCoy's behavior after Charlie Kirk was shot. Kolvet says Mikey covered his ears because the shot was "so blaringly loud" and that he was "so shell shocked." Mikey then turns around and calls Erika Kirk, and his father, Rob McCoy, as Charlie had apparently instructed him to. It's hard to say how one will react in a chaotic and terrifying situation like this, which may explain the seemingly strange behavior. What do you guys think? Does this satisfy your concerns?
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 address a viral video about Charlie’s chief of staff, Mikey, and explain why they are discussing it.
- The video in question attacks Mikey, Charlie’s chief of staff, claiming based on a few seconds of clips that he allegedly has a nonchalant or calm reaction to Charlie’s murder. They describe this as a “extremely disgusting attack.”
- Speaker 1 recounts what happened: they were at the scene when a shooting occurred. The loud crack is heard; they turn and see Charlie has been shot. They realize there is a shooter on the scene. They decide to get out of there rather than be shot, noting Charlie had a security team that leapt into action to get Charlie out.
- Speaker 0 notes their own actions: he, too, considered getting into the car, but decided against it. He was ahead of Mikey as they left. He recalls a moment where he paused to assess the situation, then saw Mikey, who was profoundly freaked out. Mikey’s lip was quivering, and he said, “I need to call Erica,” then took his phone and began calling Erica. Speaker 0 also called his own mom, saying there had been a shooting and that he was okay.
- They describe Mikey’s later actions: after the initial shock, Mikey took charge like a “general directing a battle,” coordinating hospital transport and information flow, and directing people where to go. When they learned Charlie had died, Mikey told them, “now none of you can say anything that you've heard because it is Erica is not going to hear about this from anyone except me.”
- Speaker 2 asks if Mikey could be involved in a conspiracy to murder Charlie. Speaker 1 responds that such accusations are vile and describes how some people online fuel such narratives, comparing the mindset to getting a “high” from dangerous or provocative content.
- The speakers emphasize Mikey’s heroic actions: Mikey was distressed but stepped up to direct people and communicate with Erica and others. Speaker 0 notes that he, too, was traumatized after learning of Charlie’s death and rushed to be with Erica and the team.
- They address the specific allegation that Mikey was on the phone immediately during the incident; they state he was not on the phone but was taking social videos to share with their group chats. He would send updates to Charlie’s social media during the event while the crowd was changing, then, overwhelmed by the noise and shock, he put his fingers in his ears but his phone remained in his hand as he moved away.
- They describe the scene as a cordoned-off area with a narrow gap that people used to exit, where Mikey walked briskly or ran as he processed the trauma and continued to direct actions. They reiterate Mikey “turned into a general on a field marshaling the troops.”
- Speaker 1 closes by urging readers who propagate narratives attacking Mikey to reconsider, stating that such narratives are bad and gross and a choice that shouldn’t be made.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Wanna we gotta do a little we gotta do a little addressing of a of a video that went viral this this weekend, and it's a video of Charlie's chief of staff. We made the decision that we wanted to address this head on because, you know, candidly, there's so much intrigue, and I'm gonna I'm gonna do a generous thing. I'm the the intrigue is because people care about Charlie. Okay? So that part, I understand.
Speaker 1: You're more generous than I'd be.
Speaker 0: Yes. And that's fine. And I am going to give you the the the the floor here now, Blake, because you were there, and you actually interact with Mikey. You were with Mikey. You you left the scene and then re
Speaker 1: No. No.
Speaker 0: Connected with Mikey. So explain what the video is. Alright.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna Set
Speaker 0: the scene.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm not going to wallow in it at length, but people have it's gone viral and people have asked us to address it. We're going to do so briefly. The video, without going way into it, is by I can't even remember the guy's name. Someone had made a video that is attacking Mikey, Charlie's friend, Charlie's chief of staff, a guy all of us know, a guy who we've seen on the show here the last few weeks. They are attacking him, claiming based on a few seconds of clips, that he allegedly has, like, a nonchalant or calm reaction to Charlie's murder.
And I'm just going to be blunt about this. This is a extremely disgusting attack. And I can speak to that because I was there when it happened, and I was next to Mikey when it happened. And what I can say is again, I can't say every single thing that happened, but I wanna talk about this specific narrow thing, that the shooting occurs. I am next to Mikey.
Both of us hear a loud crack. We both turn. We both see Charlie who has been shot. Both of us, I think at about the same time, realize that that means there is a shooter who is on the scene. And, you know, you just hear the crack, so you don't know, did it come from far away?
Did it come from close? Is there a mass shooter unfolding right now? So I and him both had the reaction of, let's get out of here before we were both shot. That is not us abandoning Charlie. Charlie had a security team.
They all leapt immediately into action, and they got Charlie out of there, which was what their job was to do. My job was not to get in the way and screw this up because, like, I had to be a hero. That was not my job. I remember even running past both of us going past the, you know, the SUV that we came in on, and me thinking, should I get in that car? And then thinking, no.
That's a really stupid thing to do. And then I kept going. So I was not with Mikey or I don't remember being with him. I think I was ahead of him as we left. And then we get out, and I run for must have can have been more than fifteen or twenty seconds.
And then I realized there hasn't been another shot, so the shooter has likely been detained or stopped or something, not in immediate danger. I pause. I look around me, and I see Mikey. And I see Mikey there. And I'll never truthfully, I will never forget what I saw, because I've seen Mikey almost every day for the past two years.
I know his personality very well. He's a very bubbly guy. He's a very happy guy almost all of the time. And I'll never forget what I saw because it was clear in the moment that he he was profoundly freaked out. What I'll always remember is the way his his lip was quivering, which I'd never seen before.
And you you very rarely see from someone that's he was freaking out. And then I think he literally said to me I I might be imagining this, but I think what he literally said was he's and then he was looking around, and then he says, I I need to call Erica. And he then he takes his phone, and he begins calling Erica, and I don't wanna disclose how that Yeah. Call unfolded, but he did that this you know, your mind extends all of this, but that is happening within a minute of all of this occurring. I remember he calls Erica.
I, around the same time, I pull out my phone and I call my mom just to say, mom, there's been a shooting you're going to see on the news. I'm okay. You know, pray for me. I've gotta go. And I remember that call.
And around the time I I put that phone away, and then he immediately calls his dad. He calls Rob McCoy, and he says, dad, someone shot Charlie. You need to call all of your pastor friends. Charlie was hit. We need everyone to pray right now.
And that's what he told him. And I guess it just it's very disgusting for me as someone who witnessed this, who saw Mikey hugely distressed, and then step up in the moment. Because after that was call that call was over, I saw Mikey, like, get total mastery of himself, that he realized he had to step up in this situation. And he from that point, he was like he was like a general directing a battle, where he was, you know, grabbing people and saying, okay, we need to get to the hospital, and we need to do these things, and you guys need to wait here. I need to get in here to get information so that I can get it to get it to Erica.
And when we when we learned he was dead, it was he came out and he told us, and then he says and he says, now none of you can say anything that you've heard because it is Erica is not going to hear about this from anyone except me.
Speaker 2: Can can I ask a question? I've just been thrown into this ten minutes ago, but the there's a suggestion online that Mikey, Charlie's chief of staff, one of the most sincere people you'd ever meet, brilliant Christian, kind everyone who's he ever met in his entire life, couldn't hurt a fly, was part of a conspiracy to murder Charlie.
Speaker 1: That's what's
Speaker 0: going on?
Speaker 1: It's it's vile. It's it's utterly vile. Who who
Speaker 2: would do this? Like, what what type of individual just to create content, do we think? Or is there some what's the interior?
Speaker 1: I don't know. I think a lot of this mindset just sort of fuels itself. It's it's sort of addictive in the same way a lot of social media stuff is addictive or in the way, like honestly, something like pornography is addictive or something. Like, they get really they they almost get they get a high off of, like, the idea of, like, that they're doing something that's daring or out there.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And I just wanna I wanna make one other point, though. And and this is actually to your point, you you you saw Mikey do heroic things that day. I saw Mikey do heroic things. I was not on-site, but I immediately flew to Utah.
We got a plane. I mean, it's not something that I'm used to, but it was like my wife went with me. We went straight over. I knew I needed to be with Erica and the team immediately just because, you know, I just knew. But that moment when I got the news, I was so shell shocked.
I was not even there, but I was immediately traumatized. My brain fries like an egg. I can't see straight. I can't think straight. All I knew is that, like, what's happening?
My wife came in. She, like, hugged me. We started crying together. And and I I can't even remember those moments very clearly. I wasn't even there.
Mikey was too
Speaker 1: scared to me.
Speaker 0: And he he and I asked him. I was like, do you even remember the moments after? He's like, I can't. I can't even really remember. I know I called Erica.
I know I called my wife. I know I called my dad. I can't even really remember the the steps I took. I can't he but here's the last thing I wanna make a point of. And Charlie because Charlie had given me similar instructions along the years.
Said if anything ever happens to me, you call Erica. Yeah. That is just drilled that into Mikey's brain so that when this moment of trauma happened, that he turned around and he knew he had to do it. And by the way, I just last thing because this is part of the the video allegations here, is that they think they they're alleging that he was on the phone immediately. He was not.
He was taking social videos which he would send to our group chat which we would then put on Charlie's social while the event was happening so you could see like the crowd come in or his interactions and we were only two questions into this event. So he was still getting it out to all the chats he needed to do, which he did at every event. He turns around and it was so blaringly loud, I'm told. You would know this better than this is what I'm told. Was so blaringly loud and he was so shell shocked.
He put his fingers in his ear, but his phone was still in his hand. He walks away, and he's mean Not even not even walk. I
Speaker 1: wanna because people are are talking about that. The way it was is we had a cordoned off area with, you know, grates, so you could had controlled access. All the people, when this happens, they all get the idea we should leave before we are shot. And so there's a little narrow gap that I think people it's not really walking. It's that everyone has to slow up to get through this little narrow choke point to get out of the area.
And Anyways, well, the point
Speaker 0: is he walks briskly. It does I don't even care if he's walking, running, whatever. Because, again, the most traumatic thing you could imagine had just happened to him my brain fried. I cannot imagine what was going through your guys' head being on the scene and seeing it and knowing again, the security guys are jumping in. He turns and he like, I'm telling you, Mikey that day turned into a general on a field marshaling the troops going but like, for a second there, obviously, he didn't know what to do and then he clicked into gear eventually.
He did. It was amazing.
Speaker 1: Mikey was a heroic figure on that day, and I just I really want anyone who finds, like, these narratives attacking him to be remotely credible to really, really stop and think about what you are doing. Because what you are doing is bad, and it is gross, and it is a choice. And it's a choice you shouldn't make.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY SH*T... Candace Owens just challenged @DonaldJTrumpJr to put out a video that he believes Charlie Kirk was shot with a .30-06 caliber bullet. She says it's better to say nothing at all than to criticize those investigating Charlie's murder. Thoughts? https://t.co/QBOENFWCOs
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 addresses Don, saying it’s better to say nothing than answer the question, and that honoring Charlie Kirk for any reason is to simply say nothing. The speaker notes discomfort with a clip and asserts knowledge of Don’s identity, describing Don as a hunter who loves the wilderness and hunting, and recalls a past fishing experience fighting sea lions or seals in British Columbia. The speaker urges Don not to lie and to be truthful about his beliefs regarding the investigation.
The speaker asks Don to make a video stating that he believes Charlie was shot by a .30-06 in the neck and that, through a miracle, Charlie’s neck stopped the bullet, remaining in good shape and not destroyed. The speaker highlights Don’s knowledge of hunting and guns and requests Don to sit down and say to Candace, “I really do think that Charlie, our friend, because you are his friend, you were his brother, stopped a .30-aught-six with his neck which stayed intact.” The speaker notes Don won’t say that because it is untrue and suggests it would spiritually affect him, asserting that hunters know Don does not believe that.
The speaker acknowledges ties and pressure from Jared and Ivanka and “the Zionists” to stay quiet, while urging other brothers, sisters, and people in the movement, who may not even know Charlie, to get to the bottom of this because “everything we’re being sold is absolute BS.”
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Don, from me to you. It's better to say nothing. Okay? It's better to say, I'm just not gonna answer that question. The best way you could honor Charlie Kirk if you can't fight for him for some reason is to simply say nothing.
Because I looked at this clip and it bothered me for a lot of reasons, because I know who you are. I know who you are. You're a hunter. You love to hunt, Don. Every picture of you, you're in the wilderness.
Your whole life, you love to be in the wild. In fact, taught me a lot about the wild and a lot about hunting. And my favorite fishing experience is actually with you. Right? Fighting back the sea lions or the seals in British Columbia.
You know nature. And I'm not gonna ask you to go about against the nature of honoring your father, but I am going to ask you not to lie. And as a hunter, you are not lying, and this is truly what you believe. You trust the investigation. I'm gonna need you to make a video saying that you believe that Charlie was shot by a 30 odd six in the neck.
And that somehow through the miracle of God, Charlie's neck stopped a 30 odd six. Not only stopped a 30 odd six, but was pretty much in good shape, not even destroyed. His neck was not even destroyed by a 30 odd six. That kind of a miracle, Don. You know hunting.
You know guns. And so I'm asking you if this is truly what you believe to clarify that matter. Make a video. Sit down with me. Look me in the eye and say, Candace, I really do think that Charlie, our friend, because you are his friend, you were his brother, stopped a 30 aught six with his neck which stayed intact.
You won't say that, Don. You won't say that because it's untrue. And I think that spiritually, it would mess with you. And the hunters that are listening know that you don't believe that. You know too much.
So again, I'm gonna ask you if you cannot say anything. I understand the ties that bind. I understand Jared and Ivanka and their investments in Israel and the pressure that's coming from the Zionists to simply be quiet. As his other brothers and sisters and people in the movement, people who don't even know Charlie, get to the bottom of this because everything we're being sold is absolute BS. That's my request to you, Don.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
MUST WATCH: Candace Owens received a credible tip (from a man who was in witness protection) that may prove the U.S. military was involved in Charlie Kirk's assassination. The man alleges he saw Brian Harpole at a high level military meeting in AZ days before C.K. was murdered. https://t.co/dz0FeMSkSH
Video Transcript AI Summary
A young military man did his job excellently and accidentally uncovered that our government was implicated in working with the cartels, not fighting them. He later realized that the government then fed him to the cartels, and he’s been on the run for his life for 35 years. Over the years he faced abusive litigation, harassment by narco attorneys, and police records that were allegedly disappeared. He has presented evidence of hitmen coming after him, and after decades he finally obtained his paperwork with the help of county clerks who retrieved records. In May 2025, the man, now 56 and with a new name, was released from a 35-year military-grade NDA.
Deciding to confront his past, he travels from Washington back to the base where it began—Fort Huachuca, Arizona. He books a stay at Candlewood Suites on the base and arrives on September 8 at 5:37 PM. In the lobby he notices a Special Forces-looking person and a young woman who leave in a green pickup with him. The next morning, September 9, at about 5:30 AM, he goes off base to get coffee in Sierra Vista and meets soldiers wearing 10th Mountain Division patches. They tell him that Joint Task Force Six has continued as Joint Task Force Southern Border (JTF Southern Border) and that a building is being used as a temporary command center. He proceeds to the new JTF headquarters around 7:37 AM and meets two or three men who are friendly. He sees about 12 lieutenant colonels and notes the presence of a key figure who he believes is Brian Harpole.
Allegedly, after this the situation escalates. The man is confronted by two captains who escort him out and subject him to a seven-hour interrogation, during which they suspect him of being a spy. He is accused of being a bomb threat due to alleged special forces or EOD connections, and he is gaslit to consider the possibility that he might threaten others or himself. After the interrogation, they conferenced with the base commander, verify that he is not there to spy on the meeting, and decide to send him off post. He drives to Tucson, finds a hotel, then flies home, with a stop in Salt Lake City where his wife mentions Charlie Kirk.
The man says he happened to be in the Salt Lake airport when Candace, i.e., Candace Owens, was discussing strange flights, and she mentions Charlie Kirk. He provides documentation: high school diploma, military records, police records, NDAs, and court documents he’s fought to obtain for this story spanning 35 years. He recalls the commander in charge of force protection, whom he could only identify as Captain Neff (about 36, brown hair, gray-haired man with glasses), and he notes an incident number given by the Captain: 8611-2025MPC446, which he believes could be FOIA-requested.
He emphasizes that this is not just about one conspiracy but ties to global trafficking and cartels, including potential government involvement at high levels. He says he’s not hiding anymore and that Charlie Kirk’s assassination coverage ties into this larger narrative. He asks for anyone who saw something or knows how to FOIA-request the records to come forward, providing the dates, times, and documents he has shared. He ends by thanking God and noting his intent to pursue further exposure and potential meetings with others connected to the case.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Commander. Okay, so let's pause and just recap there very quickly. And I'm gonna tell you what this has to do with Charlie Kirk. Okay? So I guess in a sentence, a young military man did his job excellently.
He accidentally stumbled upon the fact that our government was implicated not in fighting the cartels, but working with the cartels. And suddenly, he realizes after some time that the government then feeds him or somebody spitefully, perhaps his commander, fed him to the cartels, and now he's on the run for his life. What happens over the course of the next thirty five years is he's hacked. He says that he goes through abusive litigation. He is harassed.
He says there are narco attorneys that attack his credits. There are he has police records, by the way, for all of this. He has presented evidence for this. But throughout a certain point in time, these police records were virtually disappeared. He had been reporting that hitmen were coming after him.
He had names. This is a thirty five years long ordeal. He now has all of his paperwork, thanks to some county clerks who did the right thing and were able to dig up these records. But you name it, this man has lived it throughout the last thirty five years. Fast forward to May 2025, May, and Harry Myers, who now has a new name by the way, which I'm not saying, But he is finally released from this thirty five year military grade NDA.
So what does this now 56 year old decide to do? He decides that he's going to confront his past. He wants answers. He wants to know why he was never protected. He wants to know if the FBI had been informed, and if so, which they were supposed to be, why they didn't do their job.
Why didn't they protect Harry? He was working for the military, and he did his job. He makes up his mind that he's going to deal with this in person. He is going to travel from his home in Washington back down to the very base where this all began, right? To Fort Huachuca, pardon me, Huachuca in Arizona.
He's gonna revisit the past. He's gonna get these answers. He books himself to stay in a hotel on the base, a military hotel known as Candlewood Suites. And this is on the evening of September 8. I want you to remember that, okay?
He has been so thorough. He has sent me time stamps, bookings, reservations, went through his call logs. I was like, I want you to pinpoint when everything happened. So he gets to the Candlewood Suites at approximately, on September 8, 05:37PM. Checks into the hotel.
You can imagine he's a person that pays a lot of attention to his surroundings. Right? When the cartels are after you and your family, and you are compelled to change your name, you pay attention to your surroundings to see if anybody looks shady. What he notices is somebody who is special forces in the lobby. He said, you just know when you're dealing with a special forces guy.
And he is in the lobby and a person, a young woman, comes down thereafter. That young woman, who at the time he did not recognize, is with him. They kind of fluff around in the lobby while he's checking in. He's left alone with his wife. And thereafter, the two of them get into a green pickup truck, and they drive off.
Okay. The next morning, now we're September 9, he wakes up at around 05:30AM in the morning because he wants to see the sunrise. He says that he then fails at finding the Army Criminal Investigations Department. So he drives off base, just a little ways off base, to get some coffee and Sierra Vista. While getting that coffee, he runs into some soldiers, again, this is just all God at this point, who happen to be wearing tenth Mountain Division patches.
And he's like, that's my old unit. What's going on here? He thinks his unit's gone, nothing's going on with this unit for a long time, but it's been torn apart, I don't know what the military expression is for that. He strikes up a conversation with these young guys, and they tell him, oh, no, no, no. The old joint task force six is now being continued, and it's known as JTF, Joint Task Force Southern Border.
Now for those of you who are like me who don't know literally what it sounds like, Joint Task Force, meaning you can get the Army, Navy, everybody kind of working together on something. And they're like, yeah, it's now JTF southern border. And they give him directions of how he can actually get to the new command center. They tell them that they're actually currently borrowing a building down there. And he tells me that there would have been no other way he would have discovered where it was.
So his intention was to go to Army CID. Now he's like, wow, I can go directly to the actual JTF six, which is now being continued, and get some answers. What luck. It is now around 07:37AM when he enters the new or temporary JTF headquarters, And he sees two guys and he's pretty impressed. He's like, Woah, these are E4, E5s.
He tells me that means that they're lieutenant colonels. And they are the ones that are checking him in. He happens to walk in at the exact time that they are concluding a meeting. And he is kind of even more impressed because he sees about 12 lieutenant colonels. He tells me, you do not see that many people, that many e fours, e fives, e sixes.
Please military guys forgive me for me not knowing what the proper vernacular. But he just goes, what's going on? He's like, you don't see this unless you're at the Pentagon or you're at the White House. You just don't see this many high up the food chain, lieutenant colonels. He's going, man, this is a pretty important meeting.
And then he sees three men walk out, one of which is the person he identifies as the person that's the center of the action. He said you could just tell this is the most important person. And he has gray hair, he's got glasses. I believe he said that he's about five'ten. And at this point, he sees that the person that is with him, and he is, he said, certain that the person that is with him is Brian Harpole.
Yeah. Okay. Oh, it's about to get even more interesting. So, and again, I'm going to say allegedly because I wasn't there. But I have spoken to this guy and I very much trust what he is saying.
I think he is very credible. So he sees Brian Harpole come out, this older guy, and what then happens is first the guys that are checking him in are friendly, he explains to them, yeah, this is what happened to me, I just want to speak to somebody. They're like, yeah, let me help you. Then all of a sudden after Brian, who he believes to be Brian Harpole, who he's not obviously recognized at that time, he would not have known that was Brian Harpole, he remembers him obviously because then the biggest political assassination since JFK happens, suddenly somebody hits the panic button. And two captains come out and they escort him out of the building and they begin what becomes a seven hour interrogation.
They think he's a spy. How did you rumble this meeting? How did you know this meeting was taking place? He's being asked a bunch of questions. They're putting pressure on him.
They're gaslighting him. I actually want to, if you give me a second, I want to read exactly what he messaged me about what took place. It's incredible. It's actually just incredible how he describes their strategy here of attempting to gaslight him into believing that he was a spy or that he was working for somebody. And he's like, no, I'm just here over an incident that happened 35 ago.
I'm trying to get answers regarding it, and they're putting pressure on him. I'm going to write this verbatim. He says he's being interrogated. He is being accused of being a bomb threat because I was special forces in the military, EOD in the military. They then attempted to try to gaslight me to see if they could angle an accusation of me being a threat to others or myself.
When all of that fell flat, they then conferenced with base commander After I assumed they verified that I was not there to spy on that particular meeting, they decided it was okay to send me off post. That's when I drove a Tucson, I got a room. The next morning I turned in my rental car, got on a plane back home, and I had to stop in Salt Lake. Upon landing and turning on the phone, my wife is telling me about Charlie Kirk. And again, this was just a coincidence.
I happened to be in the airport at the time that you were talking about all of those strange flights that were taking place there. I did not notice anything helpful, other than the fact that the airport was not very crowded. So after seven hours, he explains to me that they were going to, they debated holding him for forty eight hours for this perceived perhaps maybe bomb threat spy thing that's happening. And he's thinking, can you imagine this, they're paranoid, but he's paranoid and thinking, oh my gosh, this is more like Sinaloa cartel stuff, and I'm being treated like this because I've wanted to speak out about this story for thirty five years. Both of them are wrong.
Both of them are wrong. This really is just a coincidence. And adding to this coincidence is the fact that he got the commander's name. Obviously that questioned him for this long. He says this was the guy that was in charge, the commander.
And he said he was approximately 36 years old. He had brown hair, the one I'm talking about that was leading the charge on asking him all the questions and interrogating him. And that his name was Captain Neff. I'm going Now, I have the same question that you have because I don't I've looked and it does seem that, and I never even questioned this, whether or not it's potential that Blake Neff has military connections as well. I guess that kind of like, I just thought this was a producer of Charlie Kirk's show.
But it is interesting that somebody, and this would be a brother or cousin, I don't know, this is the person that interrogated him. And eventually, he says, was a person that had a heart and realized that he was not a part of any spy network, and eventually escorted him off of the base and onto his way. That's a lot of coincidence for me. Now he says to me, communicated this to me very clearly, he said, Candace, I know how these meetings work. These are the meetings that are had ahead of an operation.
Like when an operation is being confirmed, you have these final meetings and they involve all the higher ups. And you are trying to do this in a very isolated location where people are not going to accidentally happen upon you because they've got something to say about what happened thirty five years ago. And that is what he happened upon. And I don't know what to make of this information, other than he feels that he then recognized these people. He feels certain that he recognized these people in the days following Charlie's Kirk's assassination.
When a bunch of people are doing Fox News, and obviously then we've got a massive event at a stadium, and everybody is in front of the camera eulogizing him. He feels confident that he recognizes these people and that needs to be shared. He's willing to tell a story. Like I said, I have verified. He has sent me so many documents, everything from his high school graduation certificate, to his military documents, to the police records, to everything that he's speaking about that happened back then NDAs, judges, things that he's been in court with fighting, just to get out his story of what happened thirty five years ago when he did the right thing, when he stumbled upon.
And boy, does he have some luck. Boy, does he have some luck that he goes from one government conspiracy to what he now believes he stumbled upon, which would be another government conspiracy. Okay? He said that this commander, Neff, by the way, was the commander of force protection. Best he could tell, he did not get the first name.
He did get an incident number, which I should have had prepared for you, but I can find it here in our chat because he sent me that too. He said, there would have been no record for this if they didn't swarm me as if there was a bomb threat because now of course there is an actual incident report and he believes that this can be FOIA requested. And that report number, if you will bear with me, I'm going to read that to you all because I think this is going to take really the whole world to investigate. It is 8611Dash2025MPC446. So that is the report number that was given to him by this Captain Commander NEF.
And like I said, he has given me every I could have just put up documents upon documents certifying that he was there, certifying that this happened. Whether or not his descriptions, and whether or not the people that he thinks he saw, he actually saw at this base, I don't know. What I will say is that something that I could easily have done was to see whether or not I asked him did you see Dan Flood? No, well that checks out because Dan Flood was with Charlie in Korea. And I am wondering about that.
Why would you want to go to Japan a day before you have a college campus event? You have Charlie on the September, he is in Korea doing an event. And then on the seventh, he's in Japan, and he is on CNN News Japan speaking. And so yeah, on the eighth, if that's when he left, maybe he left on the ninth, you've got a twelve hour flight back home. And I have questions and somebody out there knows something.
And I don't know what to say other than this feels right. This feels right to me. This feels to me as we were speaking about yesterday about global trafficking and cartels and the government involved in this somehow and implicated in this somehow in ways that we don't quite understand, but that we know involves the highest possible levels of corruption, that this feels right. And like I said, he is not hiding. He is done hiding.
He has been silenced for thirty five years, running from his life and being gaslit about that. And the same way that I am being gaslit about that. And I have a very terrifying update for you regarding people that have been trying to assassinate me. And speaking to him was I guess emotionally qualifying because exactly what he's been going through, I've been going through, he didn't have the platform to be able to get his name out. And I said to him, do you want to come out?
And he said, yeah, I've been silent for thirty five years. He said, I watch your stuff and I can't believe that you got this email. And I said to him, the chances of me seeing this were basically slim to none. And it was the first email that was in my box and I just called you. And I feel God moving in that.
And despite the I mean, just the utterly demonic and satanic action and the level of collusion that had to take place for 09:10 to happen. I do also know, as I have always known spiritually, that they wouldn't get away with it. And I think Charlie, whatever vision he had in which he knew his life would be short and which he knew that I would not let this go because I somehow feel tied to it and we're seeing more and more every day, that's somehow I am tied to this. I think that this is God operating. I really do.
I think Bless this man. Thank you so much for your service to this country. I know that he wants to, he said he would love to meet Ian Carroll and I guess he's watching his stuff and I will obviously make that happen and much more in the coming days. I don't expect the Feds to reach out. I don't expect them to be interested in this angle or this potential meeting that I think they probably already knew about.
I do hope though that somebody else saw something and somebody knows the quickest way to FOIA request that stuff. Somebody knows how to get behind this so we can get information. I've given you the dates. I've given you the times. He has given so much more.
I know I just thank God that I saw that email. We're gonna pause there. And if you guys know anything,
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
Steven Crowder: "Do you hate all Jews?" Nick Fuentes: "No." Crowder: "Do you consider yourself an antisemite?" Fuentes: "No." Crowder: "Do you believe white people are superior?" Fuentes: "No." @NickJFuentes also says he isn't a Fed and that it appears Tyler Robinson murdered Charlie Kirk.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The host asks Nick Fuentes to clear up common misconceptions. The host asks if Fuentes hates all Jews. Fuentes answers no. The host asks if Fuentes is an anti-Semite or a noted anti-Semite. Fuentes answers no. The host asks if Fuentes believes white people are superior to all other races. Fuentes answers no. The host asks if Fuentes wants to eradicate all non-whites from the United States. Fuentes answers no. The host notes Barry Weiss may be watching. The host mentions a recurring claim that Fuentes is a Fed. The host asks Fuentes if he is a Fed. Fuentes answers no.
The host references a claim by Julie Michaels that Fuentes had said that women either want or need to be raped and asks Fuentes to confirm whether he believes women should be raped as a matter of policy. Fuentes responds, “Yeah. You’re correct on that. Yes.”
The host then addresses controversy about Fuentes’ view on Charlie Kirk and asks about a conspiracy theory that Fuentes blames Jews for everything, specifically whether Fuentes believes the Jews killed Charlie Kirk. Fuentes responds that he does not believe that; as it stands right now, he thinks it was Tyler Robinson.
The host concludes that this topic has generated speculation and suggests many would lump Fuentes together with those conspiracies. The host then says they’ve cleared that up and notes that some listeners may be new to Fuentes’ story, asking Fuentes to share his background.
Fuentes is then asked to tell “folks out here” his story, signaling a transition to a personal background recount.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Nick, I think there's some misconceptions of you. I've heard this said. Can you clear the air? Nick Fuentes, do you hate all Jews, sir?
Speaker 1: No. No, I don't.
Speaker 0: Okay. Do you consider yourself an anti semite, a noted anti semite? No. Okay. Clears that up.
Do you believe that white people are superior to all other races on the planet? No. Okay. Do you want to eradicate all non whites from The United States? No.
Okay. Well, Barry Weiss will be very happy to hear that. No doubt she's watching. And then because this happens a lot, right? It's a you're a Fed Tucker did this with you.
Fed Fed Fed. Nick Fuentes, are you in fact a Fed? No. Okay. I'm gonna get through these really quickly.
They're actually there's not much so this week, Julie Michaels will be on the show next week while you're doing Pierce Morgan censored and she said that we need to disavow you and specifically said you had said that women either want or need to be raped. Now I looked for this, I have not found as a matter of prescription from you, correct me if I'm wrong, that you believe women should be raped as a matter of policy. Do I have that right?
Speaker 1: Yeah. You're correct on that. Yes.
Speaker 0: Okay. Alright. So so she's wrong, she's just an angry lesbian. Got it. Now, finally this one might surprise people because I know you and Charlie Kirk were sort of rivals as you've described.
Been a lot of controversy floating around that and people often say that you blame the Jews for everything. Do you believe the Jews killed Charlie Kirk? That's one of the conspiracies out there right now. What's your position on that?
Speaker 1: I don't believe that. As it stands right now, I think it was Tyler Robinson.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Me too. And if there's something else I I hope that we find out but I think a lot of people would just sort of toss you in that lot.
Okay. I think we've cleared that up. So look, there's some people who might be new to you here. I know you've told your story quite a few times. Some people here may not have heard your background.
Tell tell folks out here your your story
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY CRAP: A local TV journalist in Utah submitted a request, twice, for footage of Tyler Robinson turning himself in to the police department. He was told the footage does not exist or is not available. Is this normal?? https://t.co/LozvmkJXAa
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY SH*T: Candace Owens just read an email from a whistleblower about the Egyptian plane that changes absolutely everything. She now believes the FBI, SS, and DEA could be involved in Charlie Kirk's assassination. "Charlie found something out and it cost him his life." https://t.co/SWC7aPd7Z0
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY SH*T: Candace Owens just LIVE DEBUNKED the claims that she "photoshopped the text messages from Charlie Kirk." She searches the messages she shared last week and shows them off with the timestamps. Zionsts are proven wrong... again. This is absolutely incredible. https://t.co/jTxDEbCTcx
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 presents text messages as authentic and not fabricated, stating that they are real and showing the date and time on their phone to prove it. They emphasize, “These are not made up text messages,” and insist the messages are real, noting they looked them up on their phone and that the date and time slide.
They reference the phrase “Iron sharpens iron” and describe it as part of a dominance partnership. They explain that “Each hand washes the other” and that this is what Christ talked about as true partnership—reliant yet separate. They say that there is struggle and disagreement, but each side gets stronger and sharper because of the other, and that this is how they are describing their partnership.
They reiterate that the messages are real and dismiss the idea of fabrication as “absolute nonsense.” They question what the point would be of making up messages, asking, “What would be the point of that?”
Earlier in the message, they state they were very clear at the beginning of the entire thing: “no fakeness and no gayness.” They mention a hypothetical involving Charlie: if you didn’t get along with Charlie, you shouldn’t think you could simply drop a million dollars and rewrite history. They acknowledge that money might exist in such a situation, but assert that truth is on their side: “We have truth. That’s what’s on our side.”
Overall, the speaker uses the presented text messages to illustrate a partnership described as mutual strengthening through interdependence, framed within a religious concept of true partnership. They underscore the authenticity of the messages, reject claims of fabrication, and contrast money with truth in their stance.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Here we go. I found it. There we go. A little bit of typos. There we go.
Okay. Here we go, guys. Just to show you this, just looked it up on my phone. These are not made up text messages. You probably wanna see the date here and see the time sliding.
Hold on. We did not make up these messages. Okay. Iron sharpens iron. It's on a dominance partnership.
Each hand washes the other. It is what Christ talked about as true partnership, reliant yet separate. None other dominant. Of course, there is struggle disagreement, but each side gets stronger and sharper because of the other. This is how us describing our partnership.
These are just real. What an absolute nonsense to think that I would make up text messages. Like, it's just such a nonsense. I don't even know what would be the point of that. What would be the point of that?
Okay? I was very clear at the beginning of this entire thing, no fakeness and no gayness. You know, I asked that if you, you know, didn't get along with Charlie, you don't think that you could just drop a million dollars and then rewrite history. Okay? You might have money.
We have truth. That's what's on our side. Also
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
Utah Valley University is literally doing construction directly on top of where Charlie Kirk was assassinated. Don't question it, or you're antisemitic. Nothing to see here. https://t.co/ptdBjwPCKH
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY CRAP: Candace Owens just SHREDDED Donald Trump for wanting a Nobel Peace Prize for helping Israel destroy Gaza. She says Israel has committed an "ethnic cleansing," and a "real holocaust" in Gaza by mass murdering children. The world is waking up to the evils of Zionism. https://t.co/Rk5bwzoSoc
Video Transcript AI Summary
And Trump wants a Nobel Peace Prize, by the way, for the planned ethnic cleansing so that they could profit on the land and turn it into a beach town. So let me say this. This is our never again. This is a Holocaust. A Holocaust just happened. Gaza belongs to nobody but the Palestinians. So when you begin to move the Israelis in there and when the Trump hotel gets built on there, I caution the rest of the world to stay far away from that cursed land because something is coming. You can't commit that much evil in broad daylight and not think it's gonna come back to haunt you. We will never forget this. You need to tell your children what happened in Gaza. You need to tell them exactly who did it, exactly whose families were involved in this.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And Trump wants a Nobel Peace Prize, by the way, for the planned ethnic cleansing so that they could profit on the land and turn it into a beach town. So let me say this. This is our never again. This is a Holocaust. A Holocaust just happened.
It's a real Holocaust just happened. We will never forget this. You need to tell your children what happened in Gaza. You need to tell them exactly who did it, exactly whose families were involved in this. And when you hear in the future somebody tell you like, we're going to Gaza Beach for a vacation.
You need to look at them like they are the absolute vermin of our society because they are, they are. Their children will be cursed, okay? If you go and you play in the sand where you know that your forefathers planned to mass murder children, you will be cursed. Every person who steps foot on that, every family that is set to inherit what they did, they will be cursed. Your children's children will be cursed.
Gaza belongs to nobody but the Palestinians. So when you begin to move the Israelis in there and when the Trump hotel gets built on there, I caution the rest of the world to stay far away from that cursed land because something is coming. You can't commit that much evil in broad daylight and not think it's gonna come back to haunt you. Anyways.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
Yes, Israel is paying American social media influencers to poat favorably of Israel. Even the Jerusalem Post confirms it. Benjamin Netanyahu is bragging about it. I was told this is "propaganda" from Gaza. Keep crying about "Qatar paying anti-Zionists." You all look stupid. https://t.co/mNX77FrFNX
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY CRAP: Candace Owens reveals there may have been a female accomplice helping Charlie Kirk's shooter. Doorbell camera footage and an eyewitness depict a woman with alleged shooter, "Tyler Robinson." Why is the FBI withholding this crucial information?! https://t.co/HGtFfYmTH5
Video Transcript AI Summary
We reviewed the downloaded footage and the discussion centers on Shaner and his close friends retracing the killer’s footsteps at his grandma’s house, with his aunt on camera. The aunt mentions that there was a woman who was helping the shooter, and she's not sure whether that person was an accomplice. "If you time how long it took him to get from that little part over to here was way longer than it should have been." "So I wondered if the girl had given him stuff. Like, if there is an accomplice." And she notes, "it said right here, that picture from Sam's across the street, he was right here. Yep." The speaker adds that the subtitles are wrong and it's AI, "I wondered if there is an accomplice." They discuss "the woman who handed over her footage to the FBI saying, I wondered if that woman was an accomplice." "TMZ already had the doorbell cam footage." "the FBI already had the footage." "Why wouldn't the FBI immediately release that?" The narrator says, "I reached out to Phil Lyman."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We came across something more solid. We reviewed the footage that brought her. Of course, we downloaded everything, hadn't actually reviewed it, had wiped from the Internet. And, yeah, the proof is in the pudding, and I'm gonna let you hear it. Now to set this up, you will recall that Shaner and his close friends that nobody knows, apparently, they were retracing the footsteps of the killer.
They were at his grandma's house, he said. And he's speaking on camera with his aunt to set this footage up for you. And sure enough, you're gonna hear right in the beginning, his aunt is going to mention that there was a woman who was helping the shooter, and she's not sure whether or not that person was an accomplice. I I would say if you're helping you're helping the shooter, were an accomplished accomplished, but somehow we all missed this in this actual clip that Shaner had posted and has since been wiped from the Internet. Take a listen.
Speaker 1: If you time how long it took him to get from that little part over to here was way longer than it should have been.
Speaker 2: So I wondered if the girl had given him stuff. Like, if there is an accomplice. Sorry. You're filming.
Speaker 3: And it said right here, that picture from Sam's across the street, he was right here. Yep.
Speaker 0: So you see, she's talking about the shooter, and she says, I was wondering if the girl had given him stuff, and then somebody off camera says, you know, you're filming. And she says, I'm sorry that you're filming, but it's very clear. There's no question at all. In fact, leading into that, which we should have maybe cut out a little bit earlier, they're speaking about how she thought the FBI had it wrong. The timing didn't make sense to her, and she that that's what she started with.
I don't know, the the timing doesn't make sense to me because I thought that it took a little longer for him to walk. Let's play that again, Skyler, just so they can hear it again. She says that there's a girl. Take a listen.
Speaker 1: If you time how long it took him to get from that little part over to here, it was way longer than it should have been.
Speaker 2: So I wondered if the girl had given him stuff. Like, if there is an accomplice, it's on your phone.
Speaker 3: And it said right here, that picture from Sam's across the street, he was right here. Yep.
Speaker 0: So just to be clear, those subtitles are wrong. It's just that that's AI. She's saying, I wondered if there is an accomplice. Okay? I wondered if there is an accomplice, which we should edit that, Chris, when we rerelease that.
And then somebody says something something, and she's like, sorry. I didn't realize you were filming. Okay. So we have the woman who was my source who said that the FBI cut the footage, and she was certain of it. And now we have actually the woman who handed over her footage to the FBI saying, I wondered if that woman was an accomplice.
Ladies and gentlemen, what the heck is going on? Who was the woman that was with the alleged shooter? Why wouldn't the FBI immediately release that? Now, again, you should recall that the very next morning on September 11, TMZ already had the doorbell cam footage. Okay?
So that means that the FBI already had the footage. Right? They would have seen that there was a woman with the shooter, and yet they chose during this manhunt, during this thirty three hour manhunt, not to inform the public that they were also looking for a woman who this lady believes, she wondered whether or not she would have been an accomplice if that if that was his accomplice. What happened to this lady? Who is the girl, the woman that was in this footage, guys?
I don't know. What are your ideas here? Why would the FBI not tell us something so evidently crucial to this story that we have a woman that's involved? Was she? What's she look like?
How old is she? I obviously did the the sensible thing. Right? I reached out to Phil Lyman.
reSee.it AI Summary
I spoke with the man who recorded the footage of Tyler Robinson on the roof before the shooting, and his testimony contradicts the FBI's account. His footage was captured just 20 seconds before Charlie Kirk's assassination. He claims to have seen the shooter with a smaller firearm and believes Charlie was shot with a lightweight bullet. Additionally, he provided a description to law enforcement that has not been made public, stating the assassin wore tactical gear, a face mask, and resembled a foreign agent.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
BREAKING: Candace Owens was able to speak with the man who recorded the alleged footage of Tyler Robinson on the roof before the shooting. His testimony completely contradicts everything we've been told by the FBI. His footage was recorded just 20 seconds before Charlie Kirk's assassination, according to the timestamp. He allegedly saw the shooter holding a smaller firearm and believes Charlie was shot with a lightweight bullet. This withness also provided a description to law enforcement that was NEVER released to the public. He says the assassin was wearing tactical gear, a face mask and "looked like a foreign agent."
Video Transcript AI Summary
A gun-experienced trainer described the FBI timeline as inconsistent: “the shooter dropped onto Dhruv at 12:15. Didn’t make sense to him. He said earliest it was 12:22 that the individual ran across, set up, took the shots.” He noted the metadata begins at 12:22 and goes into 12:23, “the very minute that Charlie gets shot,” and that he had “just stopped recording about twenty seconds before the shot rang out.” He described the shooter as “dressed in tactical gear, and he was wearing a face mask,” and to him, the person “looked to him like a foreign agent” and a “highly trained assassin.” After George Zinn got arrested, he ran to campus and said, “this is the wrong person … the complete wrong description.” The real description was “wearing tactical gear” and “obviously young” who “sprinted back after taking the shot.” He said the “now infamous veteran's shirt with the American flag on it and some jeans” wasn’t accurate. He said the gun FBI found was not the gun that he saw; “the gun that he saw was smaller.” He texted: “watching the video of the impact… the assassin may have used a 10 or 20 round magazine” and guessed “Hornady V Max” or similar “lightweight two twenty three bullet” designed for rapid expansion; copper shards rather than one large copper coated lead slug.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He was a very much, and maybe this is a poor way of saying it, a straight shooter said, yes. You know, I have a training. I, and I don't wanna give too many identifying details here, but this person himself has a lot of experience with guns and knows guns and, you know, helps to train people in that sort of a capacity and said that they observed that individual, the FBI saying that the shooter dropped onto Dhruv at 12:15. Didn't make sense to him. He said earliest it was 12:22 that the individual ran across, set up, took the shots.
And I said, well, you must have been there because he then sends me the I I wanted to see all of the metadata of when he took that footage. And the metadata begins at 12:22 and goes into 12:23, the very minute that Charlie gets shot. And he says, yeah, I saw the shots. I had just stopped recording about twenty seconds before the shot rang out. And he said that he told them a description of what the shooter looked like, and it was not the description that the entire world received less than twenty four hours later of this person, Tyler Robinson, wearing jeans.
I said, was he wearing jeans? He said, no. Actually, this person was dressed in tactical gear, and he was wearing a face mask. And he said, according to him, like I said, he has a lot of experience with guns, that this person looked to him like a foreign agent. I don't I don't know if he's wearing all black, how he got that, but he said there's no he was very certain that this person was skilled, knew exactly what he was doing, and was highly trained, like a highly trained assassin, so to speak.
Okay? He then says something else. As soon as George Zinn got arrested and that started circulating, he ran to someone on campus and said, this is the wrong person. I observed this person with my eyes. You have the complete wrong description.
Person you're looking for is wearing tactical gear and is obviously young because I watched him sprint back after taking the shot. I saw this with my own two eyes. And for whatever reason, that never made its way out, That we can see of a description of a person wearing tactical gear, we're kinda left with this idea that he was wearing the now infamous veteran's shirt with the American flag on it and some jeans. So he also said something that we had not heard, which is that he knows guns, and the gun that the FBI found was not the gun that he saw, that the gun that he saw was smaller. And I'm going to read you directly a text message that he sent me, again, protecting his identity.
He said, watching the video of the impact, hearing the sharp crack instead of a big hunting rifle's boom, and seeing what looked like a shorter rifle platform, albeit with the absence of the shape of a standard 30 round magazine, the assassin may have used a 10 or 20 round magazine only expecting to shoot once or twice. I would guess that he was shot with a Hornady V Max or similar lightweight two twenty three bullet designed for very rapid expansion. Of course, I don't have access to any autopsy reports like you might, but if they found small shards of copper rather than one large copper coated lead slug, that's the gun and bullet I would expect was used.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
BREAKING: Candace Owens releases an unseen photo of Tyler Robinson at a Dairy Queen, in Orem at 6:38 p.m., after the shooting. He is seen, unbothered and calm, in a maroon shirt, blue jeans, hat, and sunglasses. The Dairy Queen is about 17 minutes from campus. https://t.co/4MYVjLR9Qz
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
BREAKING: Youtube just removed the alleged manifesto video of the Minneapolis Catholic School Shooter, Robin Westman. Here are several screenshots from the video of the manifesto. Absolutely evil. https://t.co/UcvXwAtOND
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
Today: "If there was a video of some guy committing felonies, and I'm in charge, don't you think you'd see it?" Last week: "Tens of thousands of videos of Epstein with children or child porn and hundreds of victims." I'm so tired of being lied to by these people... https://t.co/PbuEcbvroa
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker claims that if videos existed of someone committing felonies on an island, the public would have seen them. They assert that there are tens of thousands of videos of Jeffrey Epstein with children or child pornography and hundreds of victims. They state that no victim will ever get released due to the volume of evidence. The speaker concludes that the FBI is diligently processing this evidence.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Again, logical play out. If there was a video of some guy or gal committing felonies on an island and I'm in charge, don't you think you'd see it? Tens of thousands of videos of Epstein with children or child porn, and there are hundreds of victims, and no one victim will ever get released. It's just the volume, and that's what they're going through right now. The FBI is diligently going
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
With 69% of votes reported in Arizona. Kamala Harris: 1,168,439 votes Kari Lake: 1,185,103 votes Ruben Gallego: 1,235,908 votes You're telling me @KariLake has MORE votes than Kamala Harris but not as much as her opponent?? Something seems fishy...
reSee.it AI Summary
America is in a troubling state, and I believe Israel has significant influence over the U.S. Congress. The synchronized responses from elected officials in support of Israel highlight this issue. It's alarming to see such coordination.
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
PLEASE SHARE: America is SO fucking cooked it's not even funny. Israel owns the United States Congress. Just look at these coordinated responses in support of Israel and their timestamps, by elected officials across America. [a thread 🧵]...
@EvanAKilgore - Evan Kilgore 🇺🇸
HOLY SH*T: It appears that potentially THREE police officers were nonchalantly watching as the shooter was crawling into place. People began calling out to the police in warning. Trump should have been evacuated from stage IMMEDIATELY. This is a MASSIVE FAILURE on all levels. https://t.co/hGQZdB27Uh
Video Transcript AI Summary
They're all pointing at something, and someone is on the roof. They spot him lying down. They wonder what's going on.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Look. They're all pointed.
Speaker 1: Yeah. They're they're gonna be. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Someone's on top of the roof. Look. There he is right there. Oh, yeah.
Right there. See him? He's laying down. See him?
Speaker 1: Yeah. He's laying down.
Speaker 0: What's happening?