TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Alright. First shot Ruger American 30 out six Winchester super x 180 grain round. Let's take a shot at these cinder blocks. Look at all that smoke coming out of there. That's pretty cool. Let's take a look and see what the 30 out six did. Walking up to it, you can see where we hit right there. And it split the first wall, split the second wall, and the back wall, it kinda disconnected and punched, but it doesn't look like it hit the next cinder block there. So it went 30 out six, went through one, two, and then broke the back wall.

We still have, basically confirmation he got shot. His right, exit out the left. If I had to guess, I would say he got hit at the base of the skull. He didn't die from blood loss. He died instantly which would mean it either hit spinal or the base of the base of the brain or either some some portion of the brain that would take everything out. So, what I'm saying is the FBI is lying. This is most likely entry somewhere in this vicinity somewhere in this vicinity, it hits bone and it projects itself outward through the neck. Keep your eye on this space here where the red circle is as the next clip plays.

Charlie Kirk was shot from the front, and the bullet did not exit. And at least a fragment of the bullet was recovered from his neck. Right around here. So think about almost in line with your shoulder blade right in the center. They did not recover a bullet from a 30 odd six. They had found a 30 odd six bullets. Charlie's death certificate certainly would have reflected that. But when the gun and the bullet are known, they are reflected onto the death certificate. There is not one reflected onto Charlie Kirk's death certificate because they did not recover a bullet from a 30 out of six. Hunters and military men rejoice. It turns out that common sense still rules the roost. You're right. You're absolutely right.

Charlie Kirk was hit by a high velocity round that created a significant high pressure shock wave traveling at 1,500 meters per second, which ripped his gold necklace in half and contributed to killing him. There was no exploding mic, and some observed effects in the videos are artifacts of the rapid sequence of events, likely occurring in five to fifteen milliseconds. The initial shock wave travels at 1,500 meters per second and violently yanks the necklace backwards and slightly upward, as Kirk’s neck juts out to the back. The necklace, still under the shirt, will be launched forward a split second later as the shock wave reaches the front. The pendant junction shears the necklace in half due to differential forces acting on the chain and pendant, similar to tearing toilet paper off a roll when yanked too quickly. The right half of the necklace is torn from the pendant junction and whips around Kirk’s head above his ear due to the backward and slightly upward force. The pendant remains attached to the left half of the necklace and is thrown slightly forward into the shirt and upward over his left shoulder by the front shockwave expansion not captured in that camera exposure, creating a swooshing projection seen in the next angle. The shock wave undulates down his back, indicating it is not uniform and propagates around the body in varying timing, duration, and magnitude. This differential forcing along the necklace’s contact with the body contributes to the tearing. Another angle shows the left half of the necklace with the pendant still attached swooshing upward over the left shoulder; the right side of the chain is whipped around Kirk’s head, as seen previously. The middle panel shows Kirk’s body ballooning outward, with the neck expanded as if wearing a donut-shaped life preserver around the upper chest. This cavitation shockwave travels through the body cavity, but the effect is not uniform. The back shock wave goes out first, then the front, imparting opposing forces that help tear the chain and move the pendant. A white smear in the middle panel, pointed to by a green arrow, was claimed by some to be smoke or vapor; it is not smoke. It is a double exposure: the shock wave moves the shirt so fast that the camera exposure creates a double image, and motion blur is present around Kirk due to the rapid movement. The double exposure explains a white streak and the apparent dual gold lines; that is the right side of the chain whipped around the head while the left side remains caught in the shirt, with the pendant acting like a grappling hook inside the shirt. There is no palm gun or exploding mic. The little black dot is the lapel mic, which remains attached and does not enter the neck. A white projectile observed is spit or sweat ejected from the body due to the shock wave. The overall claim is that Kirk was hit with a high-velocity round in the neck down into the body cavity, creating a fast-moving shock wave that tore the necklace, swung it around, and produced the observed video artifacts and motions. The speaker invites feedback, asking what others think and what might be wrong or missing.

I was running southwest when Rosenbaum threw something at me. It looked like a chain. I turned around, pointed my gun at him, but he kept chasing. I heard a gunshot, turned back, and saw Rosenbaum reaching for my gun.

Speaker 0 expresses frustration with how podcasts interview figures like Jack Posobiac, Benny Johnson, Andrew Colvord, and Turning Point USA, accusing them of feeding narratives and avoiding obvious questions. He mentions wanting CCTV footage and Turning Point material, and challenges the idea that someone could be shot in the neck with a 30-06 from 150 yards. He references the “magic man of steel” and questions the official narrative around Charlie Kirk’s filming or assassination, calling out perceived manipulation by right-wing media and “controlled opposition.” He urges viewers to follow Intel Skiff, praising him for uncovering information, and asserts that the 30-06 could not have left an exit wound consistent with a neck wound in Charlie Kirk’s case. He insists supporters seek the truth and accuses media figures of fabrication. Speaker 1 then describes a physical test designed to test the claims. He lists the ammunition: an 80-grain ELDX for 22 Creedmoor, a 178-grain ELDX for 30-06, and a 150-grain FMJ for 30-06. The setup includes a pork shoulder about four-and-a-half inches thick taped to a steel plate, with two-liter bottles positioned behind the steel. The test is conducted at 150 yards. They record shots with the 30-06 and then the 22 Creedmoor, intending that if the 22 Creedmoor fails to produce a negative wound, there would be a negative wound from the 30-06. For the 178-grain 30-06 ELDX: the pork shoulder is described as completely ripped through, with the neck represented by the pork shoulder, and the steel plate also being penetrated, followed by an exit wound on the two-liter bottle. They assert the 30-06 blew straight through the neck/shoulder mock, through the steel, and through the Coke bottle behind it, demonstrating a complete through-and-through. They emphasize that the evidence shows the steel plate and two-liter bottle sustained exit wounds, supporting their narrative that a 30-06 at 150 yards would penetrate in this setup. For the 150-grain FMJ 30-06: they report it went through the mock neck and through the steel, with an exit wound observed on the two-liter, again indicating a through-and-through. They then switch to the 22 Creedmoor: the shooter’s wife fires the 22 Creedmoor from the same elevated position. The 22 Creedmoor is described as smaller with less energy than the 30-06, yet it completely penetrates the neck mock and the steel, with an exit on the two-liter bottle. The testers point out that the 22 Creedmoor, in this setup, penetrated both the neck-mock and steel at 150 yards, undermining the claim that a 30-06 would be stopped by a neck at that distance. The overall takeaway, according to Speaker 1, is that both the neck mock and steel behind it were penetrated by the 22 Creedmoor, and that the 30-06 would likewise penetrate in this configuration, challenging the notion that the official narrative about Charlie Kirk’s injury could be accurate. The video underscores the comparison between the two calibers and highlights the steel plate as a decisive barrier in the demonstration.

There was a lone shooter, and we had grainy footage of somebody jumping off a roof; it was established there was one person we were looking for, and that gave us the shooting scene at a spot about 140 yards away with roof indents. "where that shot was allegedly taken from with the weapon allegedly used, is a 30 aught six, the wound is entirely inconsistent with that weapon in that spot. It really just couldn't have happened exactly like they said. This is a very easy through and through round. This is not there's really no bones in the way." "And the way ballistics works is is bullets go in a straight line until and unless something acts on them. ... there was no exit wound." "Right? So what do we do with that information? And the only thing I can think to do with that information is to posit that this round shot at this angle would have gone through and through the neck easy. It probably would have gone through five necks in a row."

"all these Internet experts are sure that it was a professional hit against Charlie Kirk." "Firstly, professionals are trained to aim for the center of scene mass." "Neither the center of scene mass or the head was hit." "The round landed here from what I saw." "The shooter got lucky." "Secondly, 200 yards is not that big a distance to make." "and there was even an exfil roof." "If you really wanna analyze these sorts of situations, team, stop looking at the shot." "Check out the planning, check out the prep, and even the exfil route." "Time will tell, I guess."

Charlie Kirk was hit by a high velocity round that created a high pressure shock wave propagating at 1,500 meters per second through his body. This shock wave ripped his gold necklace in half and contributed to killing him. The analysis argues there was no exploding microphone and that some video artifacts can be explained by the rapid sequence of events occurring in milliseconds. The initial shock wave travels at 1,500 m/s and violently yanks the necklace backwards and slightly upward, as Kirk’s neck juts out to the back. The necklace, still under the shirt, is later launched forward a split second later as the shock wave reaches the front. The pendant junction shears the chain due to differential forces acting on the chain and pendant. The right half of the necklace is torn away from the pendant junction and whips around Kirk’s head above his ear due to the backward and slightly upward force. The pendant remains attached to the left half of the necklace and is thrown slightly forward into the shirt and upward over his left shoulder by the frontward expansion of the shock wave, which is not captured in that camera exposure, creating a swooshing projection seen in the next angle. The shock wave undulates down his back, indicating it is not uniform in timing, duration, or magnitude. It propagates around in an undulating manner: out the back, down the back, then forward into the chest and upward. This differential force along the length of the necklace, in contact with the body, leads to the tearing. The left half of the necklace with the pendant attached swooshes upward over the left shoulder; the right side of the chain is whipped around Kirk’s head, as seen in the prior frame. The middle panel shows Kirk’s body ballooned, with the neck expanded, resembling a donut-like inflation around the upper chest, interpreted as cavitation shockwave traveling through the body cavity. This is not uniform: the shock wave went out the back first, then a split second later out the front, imparting force on the pendant to the front and upward, opposing the force on the necklace going backward, contributing to the tearing and the swooping motions. A white smear in the middle panel, pointed to by a green arrow, is not smoke or vapor from a mic explosion. It is a double exposure: the shock wave’s speed causes the shirt to move so quickly that the camera exposure cannot keep up, producing a double exposure and motion blur. The middle panel’s double gold line is two chains forming a V due to the double exposure; in reality, there is one chain, with the right side whipped around the head and the left side still caught in the shirt, the pendant acting like a grappling hook inside the shirt. The video shows a possible exploding lapel mic claim, but the analysis notes that the mic is still attached after the shirt jerks and rebounds, not entering the neck. A small black dot is identified as the lapel mic and remains in place. The white projectile at the end is identified as spit or sweat ejected from the body due to the shock wave, not gang violence. In summary, the account asserts Charlie Kirk was hit by a high velocity round into the neck and body cavity, creating a 1,500 m/s shock wave that tore the necklace and caused the observed motions; there was no exploding mic or palm gun, and artifacts in the video are explained by rapid movement and double exposure. The presenter invites feedback and corrections.

A Secret Service sniper reportedly neutralized a threat with one bullet from approximately 400 yards away. One person stated that if the sniper hadn't acted, more people could have been hurt. Despite this, some suggest the possibility of a second shooter. A video by John Collin allegedly shows a bullet traveling down the bleachers at an angle inconsistent with the location of Thomas Crooks. The video purportedly shows the bullet's trajectory, impact on clothing, and impact on a railing. Some suggest that the task force should examine Collin's video evidence, which allegedly shows a bullet trajectory that could not have originated from Thomas Crooks' position. Bullet trajectory and coefficients are cited as key factors, with John Collin's video showing the line of sight to injured individuals and the stage, raising questions about the number of shots fired. A single video allegedly captures three kinetic events in a straight line, suggesting a trajectory.

There is a spot on the shirt. And that spot on the shirt also correlates with the very top edge of this body armor. And you can also see the first appearance of an entrance wound, and that's really weird too. A round that impact the upper edge of his body armor, and then that round deflected directly upward. So now what we're dealing with is not only a deformed projectile, but it's also now moving upward, which would make the wound larger, both because of its deformation and now its angle of entry, and it's also probably fragmented as well. I never saw that exit wound. And I think it's because basically we had that round hit deflect directly upward and up into his cranial cavity. I think Charlie was dead the moment right at impact. I know later on, there was reports that he was in critical condition, that there was a pulse.

The secret service sniper quickly identified a threat when he noticed smoke and flames from a gun. Within five seconds, he took a precise shot from approximately 400 yards away, hitting the shooter who was 130 yards distant but on the opposite side of the field. His extraordinary marksmanship prevented a potentially disastrous situation, as many more people could have been harmed if he hadn't acted swiftly and accurately.

As you can see, this new trajectory places a shooter on the roof of the Sorenson Center, and the shot would come at a much steeper down angle and a much larger angle off of the perpendicular, such that a bullet entering Charlie's neck would hit his spine and glance downward into his chest cavity, killing him instantly. "Before we had a flag and we had" "it so it's positioned above the tent so it'd be in" "the camera" "and made us move. What was that?" "It's too crowded." "It's just there's just so much." "This is so much so."

The speaker notes that a "spot on the shirt" correlates with the "very top edge of this body armor," and identifies the "first appearance of an entrance wound," which is described as "really weird too." He states that, "When we see an entrance wound from a firearm, especially on the skin and something in an area that's soft tissue like the neck, we normally don't see such a large hole there with the entrance wound." He calls the wound "a fairly massive wound," and explains that "we had a round that impact the upper edge of his body armor, and then that round deflected directly upward," making the wound larger and likely fragmented. He notes there is no exit wound observed, since "that round hit deflect directly upward and up into his cranial cavity," and concludes, "I’m fairly certain that that projectile is still inside of his body" and "Charlie was dead the moment right at impact." He adds that there were reports "he was in critical condition, that there was a pulse."

Zeb Boykin analyzes a shooting using four of nine camera angles, noting “there’s nine camera angles” and “we’re only gonna use four of them” before revisiting camera1. He states “the FBI lies to us” and limits discussion to ballistics. He claims a frame before impact shows the “bullet” at Charlie Kirk, and in camera2 “an exit wound in the neck” with “the earpiece” dislodged and “the cord pulling the shirt” as the mic is drawn by the shockwave. He says “the earpiece is not body armor” and dismisses a “reflection” in camera4. He mentions a possible muzzle flash (grainy) and discusses a temporary cavity, yaw, and bullet tumbling. He estimates a smaller caliber, possibly nine millimeter, and suggests a base-of-skull hit causing instantaneous incapacitation, not a rifle. He concludes, “The FBI is lying to you,” and, “This cannot happen if the shooter is shooting on the roof straight on.”

A Secret Service sniper neutralized a threat from approximately 400 yards away with one bullet. The sniper was able to assess the problem and act within five seconds, potentially preventing further harm. Despite this, some believe a second shooter may have been involved. A video by John Collin allegedly shows a bullet trajectory inconsistent with the identified shooter, Thomas Crooks. The video purportedly depicts a bullet traveling down the bleachers, disturbing clothing, hitting a railing, and creating a puff, with a trajectory misaligned with Crooks' position. There are calls to examine Collin's video evidence and bring him in for questioning regarding the possibility of a second shooter, as bullet trajectory doesn't lie. The video allegedly shows the line of sight to injured people and the stage, raising questions about the number of shots fired. Analysis of the video suggests three kinetic events in a straight line, indicating a trajectory that could be extrapolated.

Gary Melton (Gary) and Mitch have a lengthy, meandering exchange that centers on veterans’ histories, alleged government manipulation, personal trauma, and the pursuit of truth around high-profile political cases. The core thread is an effort to verify Mitch’s claims about his SF background and to explore broader claims about political interference, media narratives, and potential conspiracies. Key points and exchanges: - Identity, background, and verification: - Gary identifies himself as a former SF soldier seeking to verify Mitch’s SF history after seeing his Candace Owens interview. - Mitch provides his SF timeline: he was in group from February/March 1993 until November 1996; MOS 18 Charlie (medic). He mentions attending the 300F1 course and a severe on-duty accident at Guadalupe River, involving a 60-foot fall that caused multiple injuries (spine, feet, knee, lumbar, dislocations, torn labrum, etc.). - Mitch describes his treatment (brace, three-week leave, then recycled into the next class and internship at Brookhaven Army Medical Center Burn Ward). He mentions ODA +1 63166/ +1 63/ +1 66 and places himself on +183 and +185 in the old numbering system; later, he notes the transition to the newer numeric system circa 2002-2006. - Gary asks for Mitch’s DD214 to verify the story; Mitch agrees and offers to share it. He references being in “Lake Baja” and knowing Nate (Nate Chapman), whom he spoke with the day before. - Personal stakes, trauma, and family: - Mitch explains a long, difficult divorce and custody battle that spanned many years. He says he was a stay-at-home dad for his son, who is now 13, and describes persistent, aggressive accusations against him (PTSD, abuse, murder) by courts and media figures. - He recounts a prior incident involving a coworker or classmate, Jimmy Walker, and notes that Walker later claimed PTSD and discrimination in SF contexts. Mitch frames this as part of broader patterns of how SF status can be weaponized in custody and legal battles. - Mitch and Gary discuss how the SF environment can foster suspicion, paranoia, and intra-community politics (e.g., clashes with SF Brothers, admin actions, and the difficulty of maintaining contact with peers after leaving the teams). - Candace Owens, TPUSA, and broader conspiratorial discussions: - The callers discuss Candace Owens’ involvement, the TPUSA circle, and the believability of various claims. Mitch says he has wanted to vet the claims through Candace and Joe Kent, and he’s offered to supply documents to verify stories. He notes that Candace has reportedly pulled threads about various shooters and narratives and that this has caused friction with TPUSA. - Mitch argues that Candace might be exploited by political or foreign adversaries and that her narratives sometimes lack corroborating evidence, distracting from “the truth.” He insists on corroborating Mitch’s own story with documents (DD214, other records) before airing anything publicly. - Gary responds with skepticism about online personas but agrees to vet Mitch’s materials, emphasizing integrity and a desire to verify truth. Both acknowledge the risk of backend manipulation, bot attacks, and the use of media figures to push narratives. - Ballistics and the Charlie Kirk incident: - A substantial portion of the discussion turns to ballistics surrounding Tyler Robinson and the Charlie Kirk incident. Mitch (the ballistics expert) explains that many variables affect ballistic outcomes (ammo type, grain, bullet construction, handloads vs. factory ammo, barrel condition, yaw, stabilization). He argues that the 30-06 round’s behavior can be highly variable and that an “atypical” (non-normative) wound could occur for many reasons. - He compares Martin Luther King’s assassination (65-yard shot, 30-06, open casket) to Charlie Kirk’s wound, noting similarities in the trajectory and lack of an exit wound in some high-profile cases. He cites Chuck Ritter (Green Beret) who was shot multiple times with 7.62x54R and survived, and uses these examples to illustrate the complexity of interpreting ballistic evidence. - Mitch asserts that multiple plausible explanations exist for Kirk’s wounds and stresses that the exact ammunition type, projectile, and ballistic conditions are unknown at present. He emphasizes that investigators possess DNA and surveillance records (DNA on the firearm, trigger, cartridge, towel used by Tyler Robinson) and text messages; he notes that Mitch is not claiming to know the entire truth but wants to see corroborating evidence. - The two discuss the possibility of government involvement or manipulation, while acknowledging that ballistics alone cannot prove a broader conspiracy. They note the challenges of obtaining complete ballistic data before trials, and they express openness to future verification once more information becomes available (e.g., during trial proceedings). - Custody, investigations, and accountability: - Mitch recounts the broader pattern of SF members being targeted by legal systems when in contentious custody situations, with accusations and judgments influenced by SF status. He cites examples of coercion, character assassination, and the weaponization of families in court battles. - They discuss how the FBI and other agencies have handled high-profile cases, noting distrust in narratives presented by authorities and media. They acknowledge that public transparency is essential, even as prosecutions proceed. - Platform, vetting, and next steps: - The two plan to continue the vetting process: Mitch will provide DD214 and related documents to Gary, who promises to verify and not disclose sensitive information without Mitch’s consent. They discuss sending further documents via email or text (Gary’s Paramount Tactical contact). - Mitch expresses a desire to appear on Gary’s show and to connect with Nate (Nate Chapman) for collaborative vetting. Gary commits to facilitating, offering to act as an advocate if Mitch’s story is verified and to help set up communications with Nate and Candace as appropriate. - The conversation closes with both agreeing on the importance of truth, corroboration, and accountability. They acknowledge the risk and the emotional toll of revealing sensitive histories but emphasize their commitment to pursuing the truth and preventing misinformation or manipulation. Overall, the transcript captures a tense, exploratory exchange between two veterans and affiliates about verifying SF credentials, the personal toll of custody and legal battles, the influence of political narratives, and the complexities of ballistics and forensics in high-profile incidents. The participants stress verification through documents, corroboration of anecdotes, and cautious, integrity-driven engagement with media figures and audiences.

The speaker analyzes the iconic photo and argues that a bullet cannot be captured frame-by-frame at 30 frames per second; at 1,500–3,000 feet per second, a single frame would show the bullet moving about 45 feet, producing only a streak, not a frozen dot. He rejects claims of a bullet frozen in mid-air. Regarding the moment near the neck, he says there was no blood and that the second of impact could have been a necklace exploding, not an earpiece, and questions how a chain could snap and blow back over the ears. He notes camera shutter speeds of 1/164,000th or 1/120,000th of a second and argues a NYT photographer would have needed such settings to capture the moment, which he sees as improbably random. He concludes no one caught a bullet moving in Charlie Kirk’s vicinity.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss contemporary conspiracy theories surrounding Charlie Kirk. They state they do not believe the theory that Jews killed Charlie Kirk and, as it stands right now, think it was Tyler Robinson. They both agree on this point regarding the alleged killer. Speaker 1 shifts to addressing Nick Fuentes, noting they weren’t going to come for him until he called Ian Carroll “retarded.” Ian Carroll allegedly appeared in a livestream pleading with Speaker 0 to join in on the conspiracy. Speaker 1 repeats the insult, saying, “If you think that I feel sorry for you because you are retarded.” They challenge the credibility of claims about a “furry trans lover” storyline, asserting that discord’s own statements say the furry trans motive screenshots didn’t come from their servers. The discussion moves to alleged forensic and investigative inconsistencies. They reference a father identifying his son from a grainy rooftop silhouette before police have real evidence, and claim that the FBI has four-k footage showing the shot but left that part out. They question the ballistic details: a .30-06 round, known for blowing through concrete blocks and obliterating bone, allegedly gets stopped by Charlie’s “Superman like neck.” They note the absence of visible ballistic mess or blood spatter and question how bulletproof the spine would be. They claim the rifle was “disassembled within seconds after taking the shot” yet was found “fully assembled in the woods.” They state that the shooter stuffs the rifle in his pants to jump off, which clashes with the rifle being recovered fully assembled. They express skepticism about the overall narrative, suggesting that Nick Fuentes may be paid off or had his career threatened over this issue, and conclude that whatever the truth is, it is “not a good look” for Nick Fuentes. In summary, the speakers reject the claim that Jews killed Charlie Kirk and attribute it to Tyler Robinson; they criticize Nick Fuentes for engaging with conspiratorial narratives, challenge the veracity of related forensic and anecdotal claims, highlight inconsistencies in timelines and weapon handling, and suggest possible financial or career motive implications, framing the situation as damaging for Nick Fuentes.

The speaker references Rob O’Neill and “the other dozens of high level firearms experts” who have created content on this topic, stating that all of them have done range testing, including the speaker who personally tested with 30-06 rounds. He describes conducting a ballistics test using a variety of targets: sheep bone, cow vertebrae, cow femurs, cow femurs wrapped in 10 inches of meat, and even literal half-inch steel. He notes that ten other creators have also performed tests, and asserts that in 100% of the ballistics testing done so far, the 30-06 has blown straight through everything tested. He asks listeners to consider a specific question: why is there no video from Matt Tardio recreating the FBI narrative shot, and why doesn’t that video exist? He challenges others to take their gun to the range and replicate the test, insisting that they can obtain a 100% realistic ballistic human anatomy head set at 139 yards with a nine-degree slope and a nine-degree offset to replicate the shot, and to show the results. The speaker then recounts his own testing process and results. He says he took his time at the range with his guns to see if he could produce results that would match the narrative he’s questioning, and he says his testing showed certain outcomes. He then cites specific demonstrations from his range work: first, the cow neck vertebrae “ exploded.” He then mentions cow femurs, describing them as gigantic and “a 100 times stronger than a human neck,” explaining why the discussion is focusing on the neck region. He continues with another example and states, “That’s why we’re hitting next.” He attempts to review the results again, saying, “Maybe I didn’t. Here we go. I’m going back.” He concludes with an observation: “Oh, look. It exploded. Went right through. Maybe I did, miss.”

"What you're watching here, you're gonna watch the reaction." "Something is hitting that shirt before it goes through his neck." "There could easily be a white vest under it." "Or what I just realized here is you guys have black letters on there." "That round could have very possibly touched one of those black letters." "The shirt looks like after the fact, but he did even have this mic on here." "There is no way to get that angle of that shot." "the vest goes through this, hits something inside, ricochets back out, comes out the top." "it most likely was a long rifle." "I'm still not convinced of the trans shooter." "There have been lies that the FBI has told us." "Kyle's Kyle does this stuff for a living." "Drop some comments below."

The video discusses the shooting of Charlie and examines the official narrative. The host notes that the official story is a sniper on a roof at roughly 130–140 yards, using a 30-06 bolt-action rifle, with ammunition that impacted Charlie’s neck and left no exit wound. He mentions that conservative media outlets have asked him whether this is plausible, and that Alex Jones reported TP USA sources claiming the bullet entered Charlie’s back at a downward angle and stayed there. Key points about the 30-06 are explained for context. The caliber was the US military standard in World War I and II, making it an older design. A comparison is shown with a 5.56 and a 0.308 projectile to illustrate size: the 30-06 bullet appears large, but ballistically it is very similar to the 0.308 due to powder improvements over time. The host emphasizes that many people now have experience with 0.308, so his discussion centers on terminal performance in soft tissue rather than cartridge shape alone. Several ballistic factors are highlighted. Bullets for 30-06 in 2025 vary widely in weight, typically 150–180 grains, with some as light as 110 grains and up to 200+ grains. Lighter, longer bullets can have higher ballistic coefficients, meaning they travel through air with less resistance and are very stable in flight, but they destabilize more quickly in soft tissue. He notes that higher ballistic coefficient projectiles may behave differently upon impact, potentially increasing the likelihood of atypical behavior upon penetrating flesh. However, the exact projectile type (full metal jacket, open-tip match, soft point, etc.) is unknown, and the FBI has released no information about the actual projectile. Regarding the probability of the reported scenario (a downward-angle hit with a 30-06 leaving no exit wound), the host estimates the odds as very small but not impossible. He provides a rough quantified sense: if this scenario happened a thousand times under the same conditions, it might occur one or two times. He stresses that it’s very unlikely that such a powerful round would leave no exit wound, but not impossible. He notes he has seen angles from different views suggesting no exit wound. He proposes that if the FBI and law enforcement want public confidence in the story, more information should be released. For example, if the bullet stayed in the upper torso, one would expect to see a temporary cavity forming as the bullet penetrates, and such cavitation would be evident in an autopsy; no autopsy details have been released in his view. He reiterates that the official account is highly improbable based on his experience with ballistics, armor, gel, and animals, but not proven impossible. The host invites questions in the comments and on his social media, asks viewers to say a prayer for Charlie and his family, and closes the video.

"there is a spot on the shirt." "And that spot on the shirt also correlates with the very top edge of this body armor." "Here we see a fairly massive wound." "What is very clear to me is that we had a round that impact the upper edge of his body armor, and then that round deflected directly upward." "the wound larger, both because of its deformation and now its angle of entry, and it's also probably fragmented as well." "I never saw that exit wound." "I think it's because basically we had that round hit deflect directly upward and up into his cranial cavity." "The projectile is still inside of his body." "Charlie was dead the moment right at impact." "There was reports that he was in critical condition, that there was a pulse."

Three unsuppressed shots were heard. A counter sniper with a tripod was on his optic. He popped his head up, then back down, and the rifle tilted down, then up, and he backed up. Another person who was prone hunkered their head down. The counter snipers thought they were being engaged because they could hear the sonic crack of rounds passing by them. They thought they were being shot at, not Trump.

there is a spot on the shirt. And that spot on the shirt also correlates with the very top edge of this body armor. the first appearance of an entrance wound. A lot of times with these smaller caliber wounds, even up to 30 cal, it's hard to see a entrance wound at all. I never saw that exit wound. I think it's because basically we had that round hit deflect directly upward and up into his cranial cavity. I'm fairly certain that that projectile is still inside of his body. I think Charlie was dead the moment right at impact. what is very clear to me is that we had a round that impact the upper edge of his body armor, and then that round deflected directly upward.