reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the tactical sequence surrounding a man who approached a roof and the purported loophole used to take a shot. They note a distinction between “a guy walking up and getting on a roof” and “getting on a roof” in a way that suggests exploiting a loophole. They describe a tactic of banging a hole through one side, stepping back, and shooting through that hole, creating an opportunity they characterize as a loophole. They ask for a quick description of that loophole again. They reference a site: the Lucy Center behind the Sorensen Center, and explain that from their position they cannot see that area because it is not their area of responsibility; their focus is threats directly in front of them. They estimate about 3,000 threats in front of them, with a larger backdrop described as “an 18,000 foot mountain” in front and a “36,000 foot mountain” behind, suggesting limited visibility of the broader area. They note that if the shooter had stopped slightly to the right, the Sorensen Center would have been in the way and would block the view. Speaker 1 emphasizes that it is a very specific point, not just climbing onto the roof to gain a vantage point. Speaker 0 suggests there was “blind luck” involved—no crawling, no secondary shooter stuck in the weeds; instead a “boom on, boom run to, boom take the shot.” They ask whether the event had to have been rehearsed, and Speaker 1 indicates the vantage point was roughly seven feet high, a small area that would require search for that vantage point if one didn’t know where to look. They discuss the possibility of footage existing to show how the shooter reached the point or whether he searched for it. Speaker 0 suggests that a drone could have provided footage, lamenting its absence, and jokes about wanting to deploy a drone to examine the scene. They frame these as tactical questions: their team drills include rapid movement—running 300 yards, jumping a wall, taking a shot—with an example of a 35-foot declination at 200 yards. They acknowledge that even trained shooters sometimes miss under duress, noting it’s not merely the shot itself but the broader conditions. They also compare the current shooter to “old men that shoot stuff on sandbags,” underscoring the pressure of real-world conditions.

We saw a man crawling on a roof with a rifle while Trump was speaking. We alerted the police and Secret Service, but they seemed unaware. Eventually, the man was shot by the Secret Service. The speaker is certain the shots came from the man on the roof.

A witness saw a man crawling on a roof with a rifle, pointing him out to police and Secret Service. Shots were fired, and the witness believes the man was shot by Secret Service. The witness described the man's clothing and the rifle but couldn't identify the specific type of gun. The witness was shocked by the incident and saw authorities confirm the man's death on the roof.

Speaker 0: "We still have, basically confirmation he got shot. ... immediate incapacitation." He asserts "the FBI is lying" and that "it's quite literally not possible for the shooter to have been on the roof that they claim he is along with other inconsistencies across the board." Speaker 1: "Keep your eye on this space here... the bullet matches the exit wound, ... the shirt puffing up and the angle of the entry and exit." He adds: "the same what appears to be the bullet coming down and it does line up with the actual gunshot itself." From Google Earth, "the shooter was up here somewhere, that's the angle that the bullet was coming down from." "the shooter was most likely here somewhere." "Somewhere on those stairs would be my tip, and if the FBI aren't looking there, I don't know why."

Officers responded to reports of a suspicious person on a rooftop. One officer boosted another to see the armed individual. The shooter pointed the weapon at the officer, who fell while trying to defend himself. Both officers radioed for help, alerting others to the threat to the former president. The time between the radio call and the shot being fired is unknown.

Officers responded to reports of a suspicious person on a roof with a weapon. Two officers tried to reach the roof, one boosting the other. The officer on the roof saw the armed individual, who then pointed the weapon at him. The officer fell while trying to defend himself, sustaining injuries. Both officers radioed for help, alerting everyone on the channel about the threat to the former president. The timeline between the radio call and the shot fired at the president is unknown.

Speaker 1 argues there are several issues with Brian Harpel’s narrative. First, a records request found 20 911 calls related to Charlie Kirk’s death and the Utah Valley University shooting; none of the calls came from Brian Harpold or anyone on his security staff. 911 does not have any record of their call, which is presented as problem number one. Second, the question is who could have called 911 if the five men in the car describe their actions during the drive to the hospital. Brian Harpole had dropped his phone at UVU, and Frank Turick’s phone was stuck on FaceTime the whole time, according to him. The listener is invited to determine who possibly made the 911 call, when it was made, and why Harpole would claim a call was made if it did not occur. Speaker 2 recounts the drive to the hospital: they ran toward the security team, got into the SUV with Justin driving, Dan in the front with GPS, Rick to the left holding Charlie’s head, and Brian at Charlie’s feet. Charlie is described as so large that the door wouldn’t close, prompting commands to “go, go, go.” The group heads to the hospital, driving without lights or sirens, breaking intersections, and beeping the horn. An ambulance is described as approaching from the venue; they decide to continue. Justin is praised as a trained driver, using exact directions for turns. Rick and the speaker are in the back; Charlie’s left leg is down in the door, preventing the door from closing. The speaker is on their knees doing medical care with Rick and Charlie’s life in danger, shouting and performing CPR. Speaker 3 adds details: they open the back door, drag Charlie in, Justin drives 60–100 mph, Charlie’s tallness prevents the door from closing, and they continue driving. The speaker describes continuing medical care in the car, including stopping to perform CPR, and the door not closing because of Charlie’s size. They reach the hospital, put Charlie on a gurney, and wheel him inside. The staff are described as unaware of their arrival, since they had called 911 but arrived in bloodied condition. The speaker notes his phone came out during unloading, and that he had been FaceTiming his wife and later Spencer during the event. He explains that he left the phone in his back pocket once the shooting occurred. Speaker 1 concludes: Turick’s phone was stuck on FaceTime and did not make any calls; Rick Cutler was praying and cradling Charlie’s head, and holding Harpole to keep him from flying out of the SUV while tending to Charlie. Brian Harpole did not make any call and did not use his own phone since it was left at UVU. Justin, the driver, drove aggressively through intersections, while Dan Flood directed from the passenger seat. The question remains whether any 911 calls were made during the high-speed conveyance, given 911 calls last 30 seconds to 2 minutes, and whether anyone had a free moment to place a call. The speaker questions if a 911 call was made at all, and why Harpole would misremember a 911 call if none occurred. The hospital’s lack of notification suggests the 911 call may not have been successful, or may not have been made, and the speaker commits to continuing the investigation, asking for input on what happened to the missing 911 call.

An individual claims that local law enforcement did not leave their posts to search for a potential shooter, contradicting what someone else said to Congress. They state that the officers remained at their assigned locations but couldn't see the shooter from their vantage point. The speaker clarifies that local law enforcement volunteered their time and performed the duties assigned to them by the Secret Service. They were assigned to specific locations, including a building in the area where the shooting occurred. The two officers in question were stationed on the second floor of a building, looking out a window, and did not leave their post. The speaker doesn't know why the officers weren't positioned on the roof, but asserts they were where they were instructed to be. They clarify that local law enforcement wasn't in charge of the building, but were there to observe a specific area. The Secret Service was in charge of the entire location.

A dark figure is seen at the top as President Trump speaks. About four seconds after shots are fired, this person steps out. The speaker says they heard one shooter in the water tower and one by the fence. They screamed, "It's the sniper," and states the sniper was firing down toward the water tower. A gentleman behind the speaker, who was one seat to the right, could see the sharpshooter behind Trump. He said the sharpshooter shot to the left and killed the gentleman in the water tower.

I showed Tucker evidence that a police post was supposed to be present, but it didn't show up. The media is spreading a false story about the roof. The Secret Service director was told to stay quiet about this by the administration. If the police post logs show a post was missed, it could have led to a dangerous situation.

I'm on the building where the sniper supposedly shot from. It's not steep. Secret Service should've been on the water tower behind me to prevent this. There were questions in Butler about why they didn't act. We'll investigate to ensure it doesn't happen again.

I showed Tucker evidence that a police post was supposed to be at a location, but it didn't show up. The media is spreading a false story about the roof being the issue. The Secret Service director was told to stay quiet about it. If the post had been there, it could have prevented a dangerous situation.

The shooter was on a vulnerable roof identified the day before. Two counter sniper teams were present, with one not needing approval to shoot. NBC News reported that previous protocols were not followed. Translation: The shooter was on a vulnerable roof that was identified the day before. Two counter sniper teams were present, with one not needing approval to shoot. NBC News reported that previous protocols were not followed.

Officers spotted a person with a weapon on a rooftop. One officer boosted another to see, but the suspect aimed a gun. The officer fell, unable to defend himself. They radioed about the threat to the former president. The suspect fired, but the timing is unknown. Translation: Officers saw an armed person on a rooftop, one officer was boosted to check, but the suspect pointed a gun. The officer fell, unable to defend himself. They radioed about the threat to the former president. The suspect fired, but the timing is unknown.

Officers spotted a person with a weapon on a roof. One officer boosted another to see, but the person aimed the weapon at them. The officer fell trying to dodge the threat. They radioed about the danger to the former president. It's unclear how much time passed before the gun was fired.

The speaker questioned why Trump continued speaking while police were running around on the ground. The speaker and others pointed out a man with a rifle on the roof to the police, who seemed unaware. The speaker reiterated their confusion about Trump still speaking despite the situation.

We were at a party near the rally, listening to Trump speak when we noticed a man crawling on the roof nearby with a rifle. We pointed him out to the police and Secret Service, but they seemed unaware. After a few minutes, shots rang out, and we were certain they came from the road. The Secret Service quickly responded and shot the man. They approached the roof to confirm he was dead. He was dressed in muted colors, and we could see the rifle clearly. It’s shocking that we could see him for so long without any security on the roof. There are many questions about the security response during the incident.

We saw a man with a rifle on a roof during a Trump rally. We alerted the police and Secret Service, but shots were fired before action was taken. The Secret Service shot and killed the man on the roof.

Officers spotted a person with a weapon on a rooftop. They tried to reach the roof and one officer saw the shooter. The shooter aimed at the officer, who fell while trying to defend himself. Both officers radioed about the threat to the former president. The time between the radio call and the shot fired is unknown. Translation: The officers saw a person with a weapon on the roof, one officer saw the shooter, who aimed at him. The officer fell while trying to defend himself, and both officers radioed about the threat to the former president. The time between the radio call and the shot being fired is unknown.

They monitored the area before my speech, but nobody warned me about a man on the roof with a gun. People noticed him and even shouted, yet no action was taken. It was a mistake not to address the situation earlier.

From the outset, one of the speakers says there was a sense that the official narrative about the day didn’t add up, expressing that many Americans feel they were being lied to. The major problem they identify with the assassination narrative includes inconsistencies and unanswered questions rather than acceptance of the official story. Speaker 1 recalls being told Charlie Kirk was shot and initially in critical condition, but notes that the video shows an exit wound and movement of Kirk’s shirt that suggests an impact nearby. With extensive experience around gunshot wounds, they say what they saw didn’t make sense. They reference the FBI’s announcement of a shooter and describe a separate incident involving a person on the roof who allegedly disassembled and reassembled a firearm, aligned a scope, fired a cold bore shot, moved to the roof, and then wrapped the rifle up. They mention texts from the shooter that didn’t sound like a typical 22-year-old and state that these observations raise questions. They say asking questions leads to being torn down or accused of holding conspiracy views, and they specify they aren’t claiming “Israel did it,” but insisting the questions about the event “don’t look good.” They raise specific questions: did the security team remove Charlie Kirk’s lapel mic after the incident and give it to someone else; what happened to the SIM card; did someone take the camera behind him; why was the crime scene contaminated and rebuilt. They admit they don’t know what is true but insist the questions deserve answers. They note that once they question, they’re labeled antisemitic, and they say they didn’t even bring up Israel. They emphasize the personal and national significance of the incident. Speaker 0 mentions a claim that Charlie Kirk was portrayed as Superman, with his body supposedly stopping the 30-odd-six bullet, and asks what would have happened if a 30-06 round hit him. Speaker 1 says it would likely blow his head off and leave remnants of the bullet, arguing that they don’t think such remnants have been found yet. They question why the chair and desk were moved and contend that a forensic expert could determine the shot’s origin, insisting they are simply asking questions. If those questions can be refuted, they would stop asking; but they claim they’re not getting any answers beyond “this is what happened” and being told to “shut up.” Speaker 0 adds that telling someone to be quiet amounts to labeling them antisemitic, and that when the trial comes, they will look like a fool. Speaker 1 says that’s a tactic of the left—when you call them out, they label you a name—and that the right is now doing the same to them.

The speaker discusses the shooter's close proximity to a fairground and the president's location. They question why law enforcement did not see the shooter on the low roof before the incident occurred, given the close quarters and visibility. The speaker expresses confusion over the lack of intervention before the shooting began.

I showed Tucker evidence that a police post was supposed to be at a certain location, but it wasn't there. The media is spreading a false story about the roof's pitch causing the absence. The Secret Service director was warned to stay quiet by the administration and DHS secretary. Negligence in checking police logs could have led to a dangerous situation.

Authorities claim the shooter's body on the building's roof was staged to look like he shot Trump, but new footage proves otherwise. The video shows the body far left, not close to the ridge as previously portrayed. The New York Times quietly released a documentary shifting the body's position to cover up the shooting angle. The shooter had no clear shot from the building, contradicting the government's narrative of a direct line of sight on Trump's podium. No official explanation has been given for the conflicting angles presented.

Law enforcement responded to a report of a suspicious person near a building. An officer climbed onto the roof, saw an armed individual, and fell while trying to take cover. The incident is under investigation, and officials hope for a thorough report to clarify the events. Despite criticism, the police followed their training and acted promptly. The focus is on learning from the situation and moving forward positively.