TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The video discusses the body cam footage from the Trump assassination attempt and raises questions about the actions of the police officers involved. The speaker analyzes the timeline of events and highlights inconsistencies and odd behavior. They question why it took a patrol officer less than two minutes to locate the suspect on the roof while other law enforcement officers seemed unaware. The speaker also wonders why the officer did not yell or communicate more effectively during the incident. The video concludes with a list of unresolved questions and a request for more information. (149 words)

Speaker 0 states that they circled the agent and slowed down the video, and claims that the agent is run over when he fires the shot, adding that you can clearly see her hit him.

The speaker describes their location relative to Trump, stating they were to his left. They then describe bleachers to Trump's left, which were to the speaker's right. The speaker claims the "unaliving" happened on the far right side of Trump, while they were on the far left. The speaker asserts the shots came from the back left of Trump, showing footage of people indicating the shots' origin. They claim something happened on the left side of the event and deny being panicked or unable to remember details. The speaker states the first shot was farther away to the right of Trump, and the second shot was closer. They insist two men were shot from behind the left side of the bleachers to the left of Trump. The speaker believes there was more than one shooter, including someone on the roof to the right of Trump and another shooter on the left.

"100% proof that Ashley Babbitt was not shot." Before that, I wanna give credit to where credit is due. I wanna thank Jesus Christ, the lord and savior. It was his spirit, his spirit of truth that revealed to my heart that something was off. So I spent a lot of time analyzing the videos and check this out. So this is John Sullivan's footage and we're gonna see the gun. Of course, it's gonna make that quick movement, but also look at where it's shooting. It's shooting really low in comparison to Ashley Babbitt's neck. But then look in the upper right hand corner, and you're gonna see something move. You see that? See, we get the rare opportunity of seeing the travel of the bullet. So let's go back to this scene. This is a video clip from main mainstream media. We see Helmet Boy bashing the windows. He's gonna head over to the final window and the one that must have been installed with thumbtacks because he knocks it out in one shot. Oh, boy. But look at the wooden window trim. This is what's gonna get hit by the pathway of the bullet. Watch this. Did you see that? We got a clear shot of which way the bullet actually went after it left the gun. You may be thinking, well, it hit the window trim and then it hit Ashley Babbitt. That could happen if the shooter was shooting from in front of Ashley, but the shooter is shooting from the side of Ashley. So what we got is actually a really clear shot that Ashley Babbitt did not get shot by that bullet.

Surveillance video from this morning shows two ICE agents conducting a vehicle stop. The agents surround the silver car. The driver reverses the vehicle. The officer on the passenger side can be seen pointing his weapon as the driver attempts to flee the scene. As the car drives away, the agent on the driver's side can no longer be seen in this video. In a different surveillance video, two gunshots can be heard as the vehicle drives away.

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."

I think I found the shooter. This guy with the white hat starts it by creating signals—“touches the bill of his hat, and then he touches his ear.” The guy that shot Charlie is over on this side, and he’s seen by others who move to block him, with one man “rubbing his right arm” as he steps in front. “Watch this”—the background figure shifts, and the white-shirt man is “holding the gun right there.” If I go frame by frame, the moment the black-clad man moves his arm out, the white-shirt man “lifts his right elbow” and “shoots it.” His hand goes back, and then Charlie gets hit. “Watch the gun shoot right now”—the gun fires, Charlie is hit. “It’s clear as day.” The black-shirt man shows the white-shirt arm; “pop, bang.” Oh my god.

The speaker asserts a 100% proof that Ashley Babbitt was not shot and begins by giving credit to Jesus Christ, stating that “his spirit, his spirit of truth that revealed to my heart that something was off.” They claim to have spent a lot of time analyzing the videos. The speaker references John Sullivan’s footage and claims that “the gun” makes a quick movement, and that it is shooting “really low in comparison to Ashley Babbitt's neck.” They point to the upper right-hand corner of the frame, asserting that “you’ll see something move,” and claim that “we get the rare opportunity of seeing the travel of the bullet.” Returning to a scene from mainstream media, the speaker describes Helmet Boy bashing the windows and moving toward the final window—“the one that must have been installed with thumbtacks because he knocks it out in one shot.” They observe the wooden window trim and propose that it will be hit by the pathway of the bullet, asking the audience to watch and stating, “Did you see that?” The speaker claims to have obtained “a clear shot of which way the bullet actually went after it left the gun.” They state that viewers might think the bullet hit the window trim and then Ashley Babbitt, which they argue could happen if the shooter were in front of Ashley, but claim instead that “the shooter is shooting from the side of Ashley.” Consequently, they declare that what they have shown provides “a really clear shot that Ashley Babbitt did not get shot by that bullet.”

The speaker challenges the credibility of the narrative about Charlie Kirk’s incident and points to security footage to raise questions. They reference a security detail member wearing “meta AI shades” who appears to be filming. According to the speaker, when Charlie is hit, the security person turns on the shades, films, and then, as chaos unfolds with a crowd rushing the stage, carries out a handoff. The speaker describes a handoff occurring to a gentleman in a shirt. They claim that this is the moment when someone takes something off Charlie and hands it to the man in the black shirt, who then runs off. The speaker asserts that the item being handed off is the “laugh mic” that allegedly contained an explosive device, implying that the security detail’s first priority was to remove the suspicious object from Charlie and pass it to the other person rather than ensuring Charlie’s safety. The speaker emphasizes that the security detail “knew exactly what to do” and questions how the person receiving the item would know what to do in such chaotic moments, suggesting coordinated movement. They argue that the security actions undermine the official narrative about Charlie Kirk and Tyler Robinson, indicating that the FBI should be questioned and accountability demanded from the FBI and this administration. In summary, the speaker uses the footage to claim that the security team’s behavior—specifically the meta AI shades operator filming, the rapid handoff of an object from Charlie to a man in black, and the subsequent actions—casts doubt on the established story and points to potential coordination and a failure to prioritize Charlie’s immediate safety. The call is for greater scrutiny and accountability of the FBI and the administration.

The speakers discuss an alleged shooting incident involving Donald Trump, with claims that a gunman was on a nearby roof during a speech. One witness says he saw a man crawling on the roof with a rifle and alerted police and Secret Service before shots rang out, claiming the Secret Service then "blew his head off." Doubts are raised about whether Trump was actually shot in the ear as reported. One speaker suggests the event was staged, pointing to the position of Trump's body and the lack of blood on his hand after he touched his ear. They claim the blood on Trump's face looked like fake blood and that the Secret Service blocked views to apply it. Another speaker claims the shots came from a Secret Service agent, not the alleged shooter on the roof. They analyze video footage, claiming to identify the sound of gunshots originating from the agent's position. They argue that the lack of blood on Trump's collar proves he wasn't shot.

There are claims online that the Trump assassination was an inside job, supported by a video. A Secret Service agent appears to anticipate a shot, prompting people to move. When the shot occurs, instead of protecting the president, the agent stays crouched. This behavior raises suspicions about his foreknowledge of the event.

"A bullet cartridge." "Right there." "It's been thrown over there, setting the scene for something that would be possibly coming our way to be part of this whole insurrection rubbish?" "Because how all in the same scene or magazine, whatever you wanna call it, gets thrown and then conveniently in the same scene, the policeman drops his weapon on the ground." "So you got the the cartridge, and you got the weapon." "Right there, ladies and gentlemen. There's the weapon, and there is the cartridge." "Right here, weapon and cartridge." "Can you see?" "Now, ladies and gentlemen, it's the finer details we need to pay attention to."

This transcript centers on footage and claims surrounding Alex Preti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse who was killed by border patrol. The video described was filmed on January 13 in Minneapolis and shows a man who appears to be Alex Preti interacting with federal immigration agents eleven days before he was shot and killed. The organizers note that the BBC analyzed the footage and confirmed his identity with 97% accuracy using facial recognition technology. The events described began with the team receiving a tip on the morning of January 13 that federal agents were blocking a street at the corner of East 36 and Park Avenue in Minneapolis. The news crew arrived around 10:15 a.m. They observed observers shouting at the agents as the agents walked back to their vehicles. As the agents started driving away, the man in the footage kicked the taillight of one of the vehicles. In response, an agent exited the vehicle, an altercation ensued, and the agents fired tear gas and pepper balls into the crowd. The sequence shows the agents continuing to hold the man down before they retreat and the man walks away. The man depicted in the footage is described as wearing a similar outfit to what Preti was wearing on the day he was killed. The video also shows what appears to be a gun above the man’s waistband. The sequence then shows the man continuing to stand at the scene. The transcript notes a discrepancy between different accounts of what happened on the day Preti was killed. Specifically, it states that on that day, the Department of Homeland Security claimed Preti approached officers while holding a handgun. That claim is said to have been contradicted by analyses of bystander videos from multiple news investigations, which concluded that Preti was holding a phone, not a gun, when he was pinned to the street. The narrative concludes by stating that shortly after the altercation captured on January 13, federal agents drove away, and the reporters or crew left the scene soon after. The account emphasizes that this footage was part of a broader set of observations and analyses surrounding the incident and Preti’s death, including the claim about the device in his hand being a phone rather than a gun.

Francisco Longoria’s case unfolded in San Bernardino, Southern California. He was stopped in his car with his teenage son in the passenger seat and another man in the back seat by border patrol agents. The situation is depicted in two separate cell phone videos and a video from a surveillance camera across the street. In these videos, one border patrol agent is seen smashing the car’s glass. Then Longoria drives away. Importantly, the surveillance video across the street clearly shows there were no federal agents or federal vehicles in front of or in any way in the path of Longoria’s vehicle when he drove away, yet that moment is when a border patrol agent discharged his firearm at him multiple times. The Department of Justice charged Longoria with assault on an officer. However, prosecutors dropped the case within less than a month of filing it. This is not an isolated outcome; it is part of a broader pattern observed in several cases. The narrative notes that this dropping of charges is not unique to Longoria’s case, and that there are other instances where cases have been thrown out by judges. From the reviewed material, only four of the cases examined actually have ongoing criminal prosecutions. This total is described as a much smaller number than might be expected given the DHS’s public claims accusing individuals of assaulting federal officers. The speaker underscores that assault on a federal officer is a serious and prosecutable charge, yet the current landscape shows relatively few active prosecutions amid numerous accusations. In summary, Longoria’s episode involved border patrols, a glass-breaking incident, and Longoria’s subsequent drive-away during which a border patrol agent fired multiple shots. The DOJ dropped the assault-on-officer charge against Longoria in under a month, and among similar cases, only a minority remain under active prosecution, with four cases still ongoing. This pattern is highlighted as notable in the discussion of how these cases are proceeding relative to the public accusations by DHS.

This is about an ICE arrest attempt involving Roberto Carlos Munoz Guatemala, a convicted sex offender, on an immigration order. Per the Department of Justice, on 06/17/2025, law enforcement officers attempted to arrest him. The officers were trying to carry out ICE’s responsibilities, and this situation is described as part of what ICE officers are trying to do. The person referenced is the same officer who had been dragged during an ICE arrest just this past June and who reportedly got seriously injured. The narrative states: this officer is the same one now being demonized as a murderer by protesters, while the speaker asserts he was the one who stopped Munoz Guatemala along with his fellow ICE agents. The suspect was uncooperative and refused to follow instructions. After warning him several times, an agent—identified as the same agent involved in yesterday’s shooting—broke the back window of the suspect’s car so that the vehicle could be opened from the inside. The man accelerated his car. The account notes that the video shows it’s the same agent; the man had a mask on yesterday, but the speaker claims the same hair. As the suspect sped away, the agent’s arm became trapped between the seat and the car frame. The agent is on the driver’s side toward the back, so the footage does not show him being dragged, but it is asserted that he was dragged for more than 100 yards while the driver of the car weaved back and forth in an attempt to shake him from the vehicle. The speaker states the driver was completely immune to the thought of running over him or causing other damage. The agent was eventually jarred free from the car but suffered significant injuries to his arms and hand.

Agents with the federal government are trying to make way for a bus that needs to get through protesters to access the ground camera location. The bus is going around the protesters, which could turn ugly. Someone is shooting out the window of one of the vehicles.

The speaker references a person who was removing memory cards from cameras about four minutes after what is described as the Charlie Kirk assassination, noting that something about the situation didn’t sit right. They mention Candace released a video showing how this person reacted, and that diligent investigation followed, including a campus visit to UVU to examine the events with a play-by-play analysis. The speaker says they will leave a link to that video but first shows a clip. In the clip, Speaker 1 describes the sequence: “He doesn't try to grab Charlie. He doesn't duck. His first reaction standing right here is to turn this way and start booking.” The person “starts booking back here,” and Speaker 1 notes that he sees the shot and that Charlie hasn’t even hit the ground yet. Charlie is described as being in a position where “Charlie’s like this,” and the person pivots to lean back. Security personnel respond by coming over, grabbing him, and pulling him to the ground. Meanwhile, Terrell Farnsworth “has already turned and begun running back here to climb up on that wall.” The speaker asks the audience to imagine there had just been a shooting, with chaos and people running. Charlie Kirk “was just shot,” and the wall is described as “almost as tall as I am.” The speaker asks the audience if they can see, confirming visibility. The analysis then focuses on the person’s actions: measuring “how much of a pain in the ass he climbed up right here and then threw that loose rock and just so he could get to his vantage point.” The speaker calls it out as an attempt to explain the sequence from the vantage point up the wall. The clip continues with the person producing a selfie video: “Oh, they shot Charlie. They just shot Charlie. They just shot Charlie.” They refer to him as “Agent” and note his statements like “They shot Charlie. God help him.” The speaker says this behavior is a major red flag and cites it as the most troubling aspect. The running scene is described further: as the person runs out, he looks to his left and, in the footage, is seen climbing up, then reacting to the news that Charlie was shot. The voiceover emphasizes the emotional state (or lack thereof) as the footage shows the stampede of people and chaos. The speaker underscores that, to them, the absence of emotion on the person’s face during these events is “the biggest red flag of all.”

The transcript describes an agent crossing toward the left of the vehicle and grabbing his gun, then opening fire on the motorist and continuing to shoot as she drives past. “Oh, shit.” The moment the agent fires, he is standing to the left of the SUV, with the wheels pointing to the right, away from the agent.

Two speakers recount a violent incident at a protest. The first speaker notes that they did not see the assault themselves, but mentions that “somebody has no video,” implying there was a lack of footage of the assault. Protesters then insisted that the individual who assaulted someone could not leave, and they began calling law enforcement to report the assault. According to the account, the situation escalated when a vehicle drove through the crowd. A Jeep Gladiator sped into the protesters, knocking one man quite violently onto the hood of the car. The vehicle then accelerated away, and the man on the hood was hurled into a snowbank. The incident continued as the car subsequently hit another person after the initial impact. The first speaker confirms that the driver sped off and notes that the person on the hood of the car went flying into the snowbank, describing the sequence as the vehicle “went flying into the snowbank.” They add that, after the initial contact, the car hit somebody, compounding the harm. The second speaker, identified as Speaker 1, reacts with shock: “Woah. I’m not in shock right now, so I might feel it later. I might feel it later. I don’t know.” This statement conveys an immediate emotional response to witnessing the violence, with an acknowledgment that distress may intensify as time passes. Overall, the account highlights an assault that occurred off-camera, followed by a deliberate act of driving a vehicle into a crowd, which resulted in a person being knocked onto the hood of the car, the vehicle continuing to speed away, and subsequent impacts that caused injuries. The protesters reacted by attempting to report the assault to law enforcement, and the witnesses express immediate concern and potential delayed shock regarding the violence they observed.

One person was killed, and two others are critically injured, including former President Trump, who reported being grazed by a bullet. Attention is drawn to the shooter, who was positioned on the edge of a building. Visuals show the shooter and the distance from where he fired. The building's size is emphasized, along with the small scale of the police vehicle and bystanders. A lamp on the building is examined, revealing discrepancies in its appearance from different angles. The claim is made that the lamp seen from the back of the building does not match the original, suggesting something is amiss. This inconsistency raises concerns about the situation.

The release of surveillance footage adds detail to the incident involving Renee Nicole Good. The video shows a dark-colored SUV on the right in the back, with agents milling about nearby before converging on the vehicle and shots being fired as the SUV begins to move. Prior to the shooting, the SUV had been stationary and positioned sideways across the road for about three minutes, though the reason for this placement remains unclear. CNN has obtained new video that is grainy and distant but covers four full minutes leading up to the shooting. The footage begins with Renee Goods’ maroon Honda Pilot entering from the right. About twenty seconds later, someone exits the car from the passenger side, though it is not clear who this person is or why they leave the vehicle. The video then shows Good turning and pulling perpendicular across the street, appearing to block the way while still leaving space for vehicles to pass by on either side. A new angle focuses on the federal officer who ultimately fires the shots. He arrives at the scene as another federal SUV pulls up. The ICE officer briefly returns to his own vehicle, then comes back, and another agent is seen grabbing at the driver’s door. Good begins to move forward again, though the exact action is difficult to discern from this angle. The sequence culminates with three gunshots fired in quick succession. The footage spans four minutes from start to finish, but it does not illuminate why Renee Good was where she was or what she was doing there. The material makes clear the sequence of events leading up to the shooting and the immediate actions of the federal officers, but it does not provide context about the circumstances that brought Good to that location or the reasons for the officers’ response. The report notes that despite the video’s detail, many questions remain about the situation and the events that led to the fatal shooting.

In this video, the speaker analyzes a slow-motion footage of a shooting incident. They question the authenticity of the scene, suggesting that the pistol magically appears in the shooter's hand through CGI effects. They also point out that there is no visible damage to the shooter's arm despite being shot. The speaker finds it suspicious that the gun only becomes shiny and reflective after the shooter's hands cover it. They conclude that the situation seems fishy due to the mysterious appearance of the gun and the lack of harm to the shooter's arm.

The surveillance footage shows a dark colored SUV driven by Renee Nicole Goode on the right in the back as it passes by. Agents are seen milling about near the vehicle, then converging on it, and the SUV begins to move, at which point shots are fired. Prior to this, the video shows the SUV stationary and sideways across the road for about three minutes, though the reason for that is unclear. CNN has obtained new video, grainy and distant, that shows four full minutes leading up to the shooting. Renee Goods’ maroon Honda Pilot enters from the right, and twenty seconds later someone gets out on the passenger side; we do not know who or why this person leaves the car. We then see her turn and pull perpendicular across the street, seeming to block the way but leaving room for vehicles to pass by her on either side. There is also a new angle of the federal officer who shot her. He arrives as another federal SUV pulls up; the ICE officer briefly goes back to his car, then returns, and with another agent grabbing at her door she starts to move forward again. It is hard to see from this angle, followed by three gunshots in quick succession. The footage shows four minutes in all from start to finish, but for all the video that may reveal, it says nothing about why Renee Goode was where she was or what she was doing there. It’s not all we don’t know.

The speaker claims Trump's "assassin" was escorted by multiple individuals. The speaker identifies two uniformed officers, then points out the second officer appearing again. The speaker then identifies officers number three and four, followed by a police car. The speaker questions whether those escorting the alleged "assassin" are Secret Service, FBI, media, or a combination of these.

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.