reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker, a retired Green Beret and sniper, believes the shooting of President Trump was a planned attack due to security measures in place. He questions how a 20-year-old could access the president and take shots without help from insiders. He offers to protect the president for free.

The discussion centers on Charlie Kirk and the handling of his death. The speakers are uncertain about the official account and call for a truly rigorous and honest federal investigation. Specific points raised include: - A claim that Canada said Egyptian-registered aircraft followed Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, around for years in various places; the speaker asserts this is factually true and notes it is a very strange data point, though its meaning is unclear. - A claim that Erika Kirk’s event had a disproportionately large number of foreign-registered cell phones, which is also stated as true. - The speakers emphasize that the FBI has a moral and legal obligation to investigate openly and to consider all possibilities, applying the same process as in science, journalism, and law enforcement. They express a lack of confidence in the FBI and the officials who run it, and argue that honesty and a coherent narrative are needed to restore public trust. - Foreknowledge of the incident is discussed: posts on X allegedly predicted that Charlie Kirk would be killed on the date of the college event in Utah. The question is raised about whether those posts were just guessing and whether those involved have been interviewed by the FBI to determine how they knew what they knew. - The speakers compare the investigation to other events, suggesting that if they investigated, they would examine who publicly posted foreknowledge and seek detailed explanations: who they spoke to, what they know, and how to verify it. - There is a request for an explanation of how the killer transformed into a radical, violent actor, with a note that the speaker does not automatically endorse trans ideologies but wants to understand the radicalization process. - The speakers discuss Candace Owens’ role: the controversy and turmoil surrounding her claims, and the idea that those in authority are responsible for the investigation, not individuals like Candace or podcasters. - A concluding sentiment expresses greater trust in Candace Owens’ intent than in the average DOJ official, framing Candace’s presence as filling a vacuum left by authorities, while insisting that the people in charge must restore confidence through honest reporting and a plausible narrative.

Speaker claims the shooter is not a lone actor but a “hive,” and says Thomas Crooks was “on the federal radar,” with an “80 page document” of his accounts and statements to be released. Crooks allegedly started as a Trump supporter, then radicalized around 2020, publicly calling for violence against the left and posting videos of himself shooting with no bullets. He cites a comment about “lining up a bunch of socialist Jews … blasting their useless brains out with an AR.” The speaker notes Crooks' online history shows him “always calling for violence” and that he later targeted Trump while researching assassinations, including “best places for a a mass shooting” and other searches like “fertilizer bomb” and “how to molotov make a molotov cocktail.” He suggests this points to “a program” similar to MK Ultra, claiming “they find these candidates in schools.”

Speaker 0 posits a theory that there were state actors or foreign intelligence agencies involved in the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and attributes this belief to Benny Johnson, describing Johnson as “the anarchist” who told him so, and invites viewers to “check this clip out.” Speaker 1 responds by acknowledging that there is reason for people to believe this could be a professional hit job. They reference John Salmond as an excellent reporter and Steven Crowder as having access to leaked information. They state, “there is some considerable evidence that there were state actors involved here,” and emphasize their close connection to Charlie Kirk and his team, asserting that this is what they wish to relay to the audience. Speaker 0 returns to challenge Benny, asking which specific element changed his mind and led him to conclude that Tyler Robinson is now not a lone actor, and that state-level or foreign intelligence agencies were not involved in the assassination. He enumerates several potential clues: a text message from Lance Twiggs, similarities between Tyler Robinson’s photo and the jail mugshot, the speed at which Tyler Robinson was able to sprint, and the “man of steel” autopsy claim that Charlie Kirk stopped a 30-06 with his neck. He then asks which of these factors was decisive in shifting Benny’s belief away from the involvement of state actors, and expresses intent to wait for Benny’s answer.

A speaker asks if the recipient is aware that many Americans believe a recent shooting was a coordinated assassination attempt, not the act of a lone shooter. The speaker cites the shooter's age, proximity to the target with an AR-15, drone surveillance, and being spotted with a rangefinder as reasons for suspicion. The speaker, identifying himself as a former Navy SEAL sniper, notes the obvious sniper position from a water tower. He asks if the recipient is surprised that Americans suspect more to the story, given attempts to bankrupt and imprison the target, and depictions of him as Hitler. The speaker asks if the recipient's team entered and investigated the suspect's home prior to the shooting, to which the recipient says they participated in securing it and provided bomb assets. The speaker then asks if any agents reported anything "fishy" at the home, such as silverware or trash, or if it was extremely clean like a medical lab. The recipient states he was not given those details. The speaker concludes that this is what he is hearing and finds it "interesting."

The speaker believes Thomas Crooks, like the Gretchen Whitmer case, was set up by the FBI. In the Whitmer case, an undercover FBI employee posed as an explosives expert and showed a video of an SUV being blown up, produced by the FBI. The speaker questions how Crooks, a 20-year-old, acquired the skills to build pipe bombs, suggesting he was likely in communication with an FBI informant, undercover agent, or DHS asset, especially given his training at a rifle range used by government employees. The speaker believes the FBI is creating domestic violent extremists, not targeting or arresting them. She is confident the pipe bombs were planted shortly before being found and that Crooks had a federal handler, fitting the profile of a loner who suddenly becomes an expert in explosives and drones.

Speaker 0 argues about K Ultra, saying they were sued and denied its existence, then said it exists but isn’t used anymore, and expresses disbelief in the denial. He claims a kid with access to guns or some knowledge was programmed, stating that Christy Noem, Cash Patel, Bongino, and others are reporting facts as they know them, while those who knew the truth are buried, burned, or dead, and suggests they are likely dead. He asserts this is what happens in Washington, says it’s too deep, and wishes for firing everyone to restart, but security concerns prevent that because dangerous people or terrorists could be let go. He says Cash Patel and Bongino are having a hard time due to this, and that he doesn’t care which side, but at their level that’s what happened. He claims the CIA said they don’t have this thing, then brought in, in court of law, that they have it but don’t use it anymore, and suggests somebody is using it and knows to contact these people. He recalls the American Taliban case and asserts that the kid in that case was programmed, noting that nobody talks about it anymore and suggesting it involved American parents and a Greek church. He describes Knoxville crime scenes with local police blocking off scenes, tarps, and keeping people away, and mentions his own sponsorship of legislation on cremation, implying laws may have been violated by quick cremation of the body, possibly eleven days after death, and that if an investigation was ongoing there would be rules about disposal of the body. He adds that he called a marine sniper who said he could have made the shot with iron sights without a scope and that the team got lucky; he references biblical notions about divine awareness of sparrows and hairs on heads, suggesting the sniper might believe it. Speaker 1 asks if Speaker 0 is alleging that Thomas Crooks was groomed by some dark intel program, MK Ultra or otherwise, to commit an assassination on that day. Speaker 0 responds affirmatively, saying he has said so all along and is glad Tucker Carlson’s credibility has brought it out, noting that he often yells this stuff and is disregarded, but urges looking at history, the deep state, and the current state of the country. He claims 12% of the population voting leaves them vulnerable and that there are few people in position who could damage them like Trump, saying they are not after Trump but after “us,” and that Trump is standing in their way.

The speaker watched news coverage claiming the man arrested for attempting to murder Trump was a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham blamed Iran. However, the speaker says the would-be assassin volunteered in Ukraine and shares the same neocon politics as Graham. The speaker believes the media is lying and omitting facts, distorting reality so the average person has no way of knowing the truth. The speaker highlights that the attempted murderer had been interviewed by every major media outlet and had extensive contact with US government agencies. The New York Times previously portrayed him as a "freedom fighter" in Ukraine, despite his criminal record and pending charges. The speaker believes the media will memory-hole the true story, and the public will be misled.

Where is the body of Thomas Matthew Crooks? A report reveals that the FBI quickly cleaned up biological evidence from the crime scene after the assassination attempt on Donald Trump on July 13, 2024. Congressman Clay Higgins, who investigated the scene, found alarming actions by the FBI that raise questions about the investigation's integrity. Notably, the FBI released Crooks' body for cremation just ten days after the incident, without informing local authorities, hindering the verification of autopsy reports. Higgins expressed concerns that without examining the body, the accuracy of the reports cannot be confirmed. This situation, along with the rapid cleanup of evidence, suggests possible obstruction of justice in the investigation.

The speaker says the subject of the interview is not a Democrat and would be offended to be called one. The speaker doesn't believe a political issue would cause the subject to do such a thing. The subject never mentioned the senator or representative who were targeted. He didn't like Tim Walz and would say things like, "I don't like that Tim Walz did this." The subject mentioned a protest, but the speaker doesn't think he said anything about it. The speaker would tell him to surrender himself so he could be taken alive. The subject listened to Infowars, and the speaker told him not to take everything they say for granted. The subject was a Trump supporter, voted for Trump, and liked Trump.

"Candice is now saying that she believes that there is most likely some Ukrainian ties, some intelligence agencies that are involved in this assassination." "it's a military operation." "None of this shit is adding up, and it fucking stinks, guys." "a person going by the name Robbie Hild, who was allegedly from Washington." "No one is saying they went to school with him." "stronger than a theory and more of a hunch that this was a military operation, and people that executed this are actually from overseas." "They have a direct pipeline from Russia to America." "What we're talking about are terrorist cells." "Charlie was on a hit list. I also was on the hit list. Tucker was on the hit list." "release the gosh damn CCTV footage." "What the hell are you guys doing covering this shit up?"

The speaker, a retired Green Beret and explosives expert, discusses the potential methods the suspect in the attempted assassination of President Trump could have used to create explosive devices. He explains the complexities of manufacturing electric blasting caps and the challenges the suspect would have faced in doing so. The speaker also speculates on the suspect's lack of social media presence and suggests that a foreign actor may have recruited him for the attack. Overall, the speaker finds the situation suspicious. Translation: The speaker, a retired Green Beret and explosives expert, discusses the suspect's potential methods for creating explosive devices in the attempted assassination of President Trump. He explains the complexities of manufacturing electric blasting caps and the challenges the suspect would have faced. The speaker also speculates on the suspect's lack of social media presence and suggests a foreign actor may have recruited him for the attack, finding the situation suspicious.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss how acts of violence are scrutinized differently and question the narratives around notable events. They reference the shooting at Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, noting it as an expensive topic and implying oddities in coverage. They mention the shooting of Thomas Crooks, criticizing the defense setup for Trump and contrasting it with the shooter’s protections, suggesting a “Jack Ruby figure” behind the scenes who was responsible for eliminating the assassin after the act. They say the person in charge of post-assassination security for Trump “popped the assassin,” yet isn’t being prosecuted, and express shock at this discrepancy. Speaker 1 identifies the person behind Trump as a “Jack Ruby figure” and notes that news agencies were present at an otherwise irrelevant Butler rally. They describe a strange, behind-the-scenes detail: a man named Joseph Fusca sat behind Trump. Fusca is associated with the QAnon crowd and rumors that JFK Jr. is waiting to return to save the world; they dismiss these claims as a “total crock.” Despite this, Fusca is described as being present at the rally, and there is curiosity about who he is. The speaker notes that, at the moment Trump is shot, Fusca does not react, and there are two pieces of footage referenced but not shown here. Speaker 0 remarks that Fusca is someone they have seen in photographs before and had been discussed previously. They describe having followed deep rabbit holes to uncover such figures and identities. The conversation broadens to the idea of entering a broader, hidden ecosystem of information, comparing the experience to encountering Gobekli Tepe in the sense that once you go down these rabbit holes, you discover a vast, previously unknown landscape. They also connect these exploration moments to broader questions about trust, recalling Kennedy’s assassination and mentioning Building 7 in conversation with Ron Joss and others in their circle, suggesting a pattern of distrust toward established narratives. The speakers describe a process of increasingly questioning conventional explanations as they pursue these threads.

The more he's labeled a threat to democracy, the more attacks he faces, which is frustrating. One of the people he follows is allegedly connected to the CIA, suggesting a possible handler. It's a bizarre time politically. Interestingly, the recent shooter appeared in a BlackRock commercial, raising questions about coincidences. Just over two months ago, another shooter was also featured in a BlackRock ad. Additionally, this shooter was seen in a protest video. It's all quite strange, though it could just be coincidental.

Speaker 0 raises a series of pointed questions and concerns about FBI and government actions surrounding the monitoring and reporting of online activity and potential threats, urging a demand for answers: - Why did the FBI present only early pro-Trump posts and hide the anti-Trump phase? Two answers are implied: under Biden, the existence of a narrative, and a need to ask who was involved in that decision and why it happened. - After the election, why did the FBI continue to toe that line, and who made that decision? - The speaker notes that authorities are monitoring people who ask how to build bombs or evade assassination scenes, and asks how such monitoring relates to successful assassinations and the future locations of political actors; suggests an algorithmic tie and notification so someone is watching. - Why did they ignore Crooks’s really unbelievable threats? Why were ordinary Americans arrested for memes, while Crooks’s behavior appeared to be ignored? - Why did intelligence agencies monitoring extremism miss a kid openly fantasizing about assassinations, who connected with a Swedish individual allegedly part of a large Nazi movement in Sweden? - Why was the scene cleaned prematurely? Why did every digital trace of his political shift get kept out of public discussion? Why did authorities claim he had almost no footprint when, in fact, the footprint seemed large but scrubbed? - The speaker notes a pattern: every single mistake by the FBI and government seems to point toward ignorance, negligence, hiding inconvenient data, and shaping a political narrative; questions whether the pattern indicates incompetence or intentional action. - Is this incompetence or something more problematic? The speaker says they aren’t asserting a conspiracy but emphasize something feels wrong and that the official story is hard to believe. They ask why the government that supposedly monitors everything would become blind, deaf, and mute when a presidential assassin emerges on their radar. - The question is posed non-partisan: under different presidents, why would the narrative stay the same if the government can see everything? What does that imply about the FBI, DOJ, and CIA—whether they are lying, incompetent, or selectively monitoring—since any of these possibilities should be unsettling. - The FBI and mainstream media, including MSNBC, are said to have referenced leaks from Crooks’s social media indicating pro-Trump and anti-immigration stances, while being described as having almost no online footprint; Crooks reportedly had Discord, Snapchat, and an active YouTube presence, with violent 2019 YouTube comments about decapitating government officials, followed by a shift. - The speaker asserts the iceberg is deep and suggests a broader pattern of concerns about oversight, control, and the potential overreach or misalignment of intelligence agencies, with a friend claiming the CIA may be completely out of control and implying limits to accountability, while noting it could extend beyond the CIA. Overall, the remarks center on questioning the completeness, transparency, and motivation behind FBI monitoring, narrative shaping, data handling, and the handling of Crooks’s threats and online footprint, while expressing concern about systemic issues within intelligence agencies.

The speaker watched news coverage claiming the man arrested for attempting to murder Trump was a Trump supporter. Lindsey Graham blamed Iran. However, the speaker says the would-be assassin's politics align with Graham's, as he is a neocon who volunteered in Ukraine. The speaker believes the media is lying by omission, distorting reality, and preventing the average person from knowing the truth. The attempted assassin was interviewed by every major media outlet and has a lengthy criminal record, yet The New York Times portrayed him as a "freedom fighter" in Ukraine and detailed his contacts with US government agencies. The speaker fears this information will be memory-holed, and the public will be misled into believing a false narrative.

A speaker asks if the recipient is aware that many Americans believe a recent shooting was a coordinated assassination attempt, not a lone shooter, citing messages they've received. The speaker questions why many Americans find the situation "doesn't add up," listing details such as the shooter's age, proximity to the target with an AR-15, drone use, and being spotted with a rangefinder. The speaker, identifying as a former Navy SEAL sniper, notes the obvious sniper position from a water tower. They ask if the recipient is surprised that Americans suspect more to the story, given attempts to bankrupt, imprison, and depict the target as "a modern day Hitler." The speaker asks if the recipient's team entered and investigated the suspect's home prior to the shooting, and if they received reports of anything "fishy" there, such as silverware or trash. They ask if the home was extremely clean, "almost like a medical lab," stating that's what they are hearing.

The speakers discuss the attempted assassination of Trump, questioning why the would-be assassin had no social media footprint and a professionally scrubbed house. They find it suspicious that CNN streamed the rally live and that the Secret Service deemed the roof he was on unsafe, while snipers occupied a steeper roof. They speculate it could have been a coordinated assassination attempt, with the shooter intended to be killed afterward. They highlight the suspect's young age and the possibility of radicalization or manipulation. The speakers are concerned about the lack of information released and the absence of a formal report. They mention leaked cell phone records showing a phone traveling from outside the FBI offices in DC to where the suspect lived. They find it odd that the suspect had multiple phones and no cutlery in his house. They suggest the suspect could have been under the influence of psychotropic drugs or hypnosis, referencing MK Ultra and Jolly West's experiments.

Speaker 0 introduces the topic of Israel allegedly having influence over the US government and mentions that Israel assassinated JFK, pointing to William Cooper as the source who was also assassinated by Israel. Speaker 0 references Cooper’s book Behold a Pale Horse and notes that Cooper was the first to obtain original footage from a CIA whistleblower showing who shot Kennedy and how they shot Kennedy. He says the media’s clips started at a cropped frame, and that Cooper’s release prompted further questions. Speaker 1 explains that the assassin was the driver in the car with Kennedy, visible in a film with public help. He brings the film, saying it shows the motorcade on Elm Street in front of the Book Depository Building, Kennedy having been shot in the throat, Jacqueline pulling Kennedy toward him in shock, and the driver turning around with a pistol in his left hand, firing over his right shoulder and shooting the president in the head. Speaker 2 asks for a repeat and then the duo watches the film. Speaker 1 identifies the driver as William Greer, noting he was a secret service agent. He describes the weapon as an electrically operated gas-powered assassination pistol built especially for the Central Intelligence Agency, asserting there is no puff of smoke. Speaker 2 questions whether the weapon is indeed a pistol in the lower right corner of the frame. Speaker 1 confirms it is an air-operated pistol (pneumatic) and claims it fired an exploding pellet that injected shellfish toxin into the president’s brain, so that if the pellet’s explosion did not kill him, the toxin would. He states that he read all of this in the documents. Speaker 0 asks what type of weapon was used to assassinate JFK and references the 1963 time frame, saying that intelligence agencies would have such weapons. He then questions whether intelligence agencies could have used such weapons to assassinate Charlie Kirk. He suggests listening to Jack Posobiec and others who are “carrying water for this administration,” implying time will tell.

The speaker believes the individual involved in a recent political attack did not act alone, citing a lack of requisite skill and the media's quick dismissal. They question if the individual was honey-trapped by a foreign entity and criticize the FBI's handling of the situation, including the rapid cremation of the body and the claim that the individual acted alone. Senator Ron Johnson also finds the situation suspicious, particularly the rush to dispose of evidence. He highlights the fact that the body was cremated before autopsy and toxicology reports were released. He notes the FBI immediately declared the individual acted alone without a thorough investigation. The speaker points out the FBI's history of spying and questions why, if the individual acted alone, the FBI doesn't release the data they likely possess. They cite a counter sniper's concern over the scrubbing of the roof and question the need for a high-powered attorney if the case is straightforward. Senator Johnson states that the Secret Service and FBI are stonewalling the senate investigation, providing heavily redacted documents and delaying transcribed interviews. The speaker concludes that the agencies are hiding something, as transparency would dispel conspiracy theories.

Speaker 0 states that someone is killing people and something happened to a guy, which they dislike. Speaker 1 asks Speaker 0 about a report that a Russian commander said Putin was almost caught in a drone attack from Ukraine. Speaker 0 responds that they haven't heard about the drone attack report, but it could be a reason for the killing.

Speaker 0: We have a problem with the CIA and FBI in Washington. Speaker 1: What's your plan to start over and fix them? Speaker 0: They've gotten out of control, with weaponization and other issues. The people need to bring about change. We were making progress, but more needs to be done.