reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker explains that "somebody figured this out, it wasn't me" and notes that "somebody else shared this other guy's work without really giving him credit," adding "so I still don't know who's the guy who kinda figured this out and whoever it is is a hero." The material has been "shared with, you know, the office of DNI or whatever." To align everyone, they propose to watch "spyplanesaga.move" together with the audience "so that we're all kind of on the same page," describing "this is what I saw and I was like, what? What?" and that "Jason's gonna take us there in real time." The discovery is "Discovered a few days ago relating to a particular jet and what it was doing on September 10."

The transcript reports that the voice of the hijacker heard on the hijacked planes’ voice recorder reveals that the hijacker’s accent matches an Israeli Hebrew accent. A subsequent transmission is noted to occur seconds later. It is stated that FBI director Mueller, BBC News, and ABC have confirmed that seven of the 19 Muslims whose mugshots were flashed around the world did not die in the nine-one-one crashes; these individuals are described as alive and well and as victims of identity theft. It is also claimed that an eighth accused Muslim died one year before the nine-one-one hijackings even occurred. The text then asks who stole their identities and why the FBI isn’t looking for them. It questions if the hijackers really were Muslims, why they would steal the identities of fellow Muslims and implicate them. It further asks whether those hijackers would be more likely to steal Israeli identities and place the blame on Israelis. It also asks, if the hijackers were Israelis, whether they would be likely to steal the identities of Muslims and put the blame on Muslims.

The speaker claims a confiscated FBI video from 9/11 has surfaced, proving a scud missile, not a plane, hit the target. They allege that for twenty years, communities have suspected a missile strike, but witnesses were silenced, and the FBI concealed the video evidence. The speaker asserts the video clearly shows a scud missile, not a plane, and accuses a "deep steak cabal" of orchestrating the event and promoting a false narrative in the 9/11 report, which stated the plane disintegrated. They believe the missile targeted a specific marking, which was ignored, and that the public bought into the lie.

Speaker 0: Somebody finally found the confiscated video that the FBI took on the day of nine eleven, where it was proving it wasn't a plane. It was a scutt missile. There was talk amongst the community because I've been awake for twenty years since this happened. That there was a scud missile. The witnesses were silenced. The person who had this tape that turned it over to the FBI, the FBI concealed this information. And as you can see, that is not a plane. That is a scud missile as originally thought. Fucking deep state cabal. You sons of bitches. We already those who knew, we already knew you did shit. But this was the last piece of the puzzle for the evidence. With that whole entire crap with the 09:11 report, they said it disintegrated. That is a scud missile. So Swedish satellite saw that there was a marking target, and that was completely put aside, and you all bought the lie. Heavenly father, let truth prevail.

The discussion centers on a rapid escalation of online activity described as military bot operations, which the speakers associate with attempts to cancel Candace Owens from Australia after October 7. They note a pattern in which bot activity appears when certain topics are discussed, including Fort Huachuca, the Obas Gai, and Cairo/African plains references, tying these to an eyewitness who insists he saw Brian Harpole and believed there was an all-hands-on-deck meeting the day before. The speakers stress a broader pattern of activity on the same day and say they verified the eyewitness’s account with people stationed at the base. A longer clip from Baron Coleman is introduced, focusing on what it means to see a SAM call sign on a plane, especially those flying from Andrews outside Washington, D.C. Coleman argues that a key piece of evidence in Candace Owens’ story is a jet used exclusively by few people—presidential family members, cabinet officials, and military generals at the Pentagon—present at the location of a high-level meeting the morning of September 9, the day before Charlie Kirk’s alleged neutralization. The jet is described as a Special Air Mission (SAM) jet; the conversation explains that SAM call signs designate flights carrying high-ranking officials, with Air Force One and Air Force Two as the corresponding designated callsigns when the president or vice president is aboard. The flight logs show a jet with the rarely used SAM000 call sign, which indicates a highly sensitive passenger manifest, traveling on August 25 from Joint Base Andrews to Colorado Springs (home of the 10th Special Forces Group), then to Las Vegas, and later a return leg to Joint Base Andrews as SAM658. Speaker 0 questions whether this pattern means a very important person traveled on the flight, noting the call sign changes from a high-priority SAM to an RCH (a less VIP designation) and later to SAM as the VIP reappears. They discuss the possibility that someone significant either boarded or disembarked in Las Vegas, with Venus noted as an empty-flight designation when only the pilots are aboard. The timeline is tied to Brian Harpole’s statements about UVU event preparations, with the August 24 date identified as when intel gathering and hard conversations began, described by Harpole as starting two weeks prior and documented in a decentralized command app. The speakers compare this to “Operation Valhalla,” which they say began on August 24 and ended on August 27. They observe that on August 25, a VIP flight to Colorado Springs occurred, the same day the aircraft flew to Las Vegas, after which the log shows an RCH designation on a subsequent leg, suggesting a less-than-top-tier passenger on that leg. The speaker notes they have multiple emails confirming Fort Huachuca as an intelligence base, reinforcing the claim that the base is linked to covert missions rather than routine operations. They express a belief in the credibility of the eyewitness account about Harpole and say they plan to feature the testimony and related details, including additional flight logs (referred to as the finishing touch on SUBTV) and visuals from a car investigation, on kennethowens.com or similar platforms. The overarching aim is to explore whether Egyptian planes are connected to Israel, which they say would explain a mass panic. They emphasize continuing to pursue these narratives while minimizing distractions from “timelines and delivering this information.”

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 0 claims to have explosive, verifiable information that can publicly challenge the Zionist-occupied Trump administration to deny it if untrue. They urge Kash Patel to deny the claim if it is false, noting that the information is highly relevant. They credit Mel, who they say was early with the reporting, and say they had heard rumors but sought verifiable proof before going on the limb to assert authenticity. The core assertion is that there were 12 Israeli cell phones on the ground at Utah Valley University on the day Charlie Kirk was assassinated. The speaker clarifies that these were not VPNs routed through Israel, but 12 personal cell phone accounts opened in Israel. They claim these accounts were on the ground at Utah Valley University on September 10, the day Charlie Kirk was shot. The speaker states that the NSA knows this, Kash Patel knows this, and people in the current administration know that too, and are desperate to keep the information from the public. They question why the administration would want to suppress the information and why it would spook those at the top, suggesting that if there is nothing to hide, there would be nothing to hide. To anticipate counterarguments, the speaker plays devil’s advocate, noting that perhaps the cell phones belonged to exchange students or Israelis touring UVU that day, or that 12 American students had Israeli-based cell phones after returning from a summer abroad and wished to keep them running in Utah. They acknowledge they do not know the answer and express a desire to know, emphasizing the need to uncover why this information is being concealed and who those 12 Israeli cell phones belonged to. Throughout, the speaker refrains from evaluating the claims’ truth and simply presents the asserted facts and questions, urging accountability and transparency regarding the supposed Israeli cell phone presence and its connection to Charlie Kirk’s assassination. They close by reiterating their dislike of secrets, especially when they pertain to the public figure’s death.

The video centers on Candace and a claim about Egyptian private military contractors being flown to America on a top-secret mission and landing at a private military base in Utah on the day of the Charlie Kirk assassination. The presenters show photos of private military subcontractors and describe them as the “baddest, hardest, most battle trained” soldiers, implying their involvement is significant to the Charlie Kirk case. They question why Egyptian military contractors would be in Provo, Utah, and why they did not return to Cairo, asking who they were planning to “take out next.” One speaker states that, according to a person close to someone who was aboard the flight, the aircraft did not simply stop in Utah for routine servicing. They claim the plane carried military subcontractors and that these individuals were dropped off in Provo, yet did not reboard for Cairo. They assert the flight departed Provo on September 10 and returned to Cairo on September 11, with allegedly missing people from the plane. The speaker emphasizes that the flight radar investigation shows a Cairo-to-Paris-to-France-to-Bannat, North Dakota route around that period, and notes that on September 10 the plane departed Provo at 07:14 AM local time. They insist the people aboard the plane were not the same individuals who later appeared on the flight’s return. The speaker contends this information was provided by a female source who knows an Egyptian military subcontractor personally. They acknowledge she did not claim the mission was related to Charlie Kirk, only that it was a top-secret operation, possibly a discreet joint military exercise, so hidden that people were urged to ignore it. The speaker describes the revelation as terrifying yet galvanizing, claiming it prompted bravery and a push to root out perceived evil in society. The discussion then shifts to Kash Patel, referencing a Daily Mail article about him shutting down a Charlie Kirk foreign intelligence probe in a feud with Trump’s counterterror chief. The speaker suggests Patel’s stance raises questions and asserts that Patel’s approach contrasts with what they would expect if there were genuine efforts to investigate Charlie Kirk’s murder, noting that Trump and Trump family members would presumably be involved in questioning the narrative. They criticize Patel for discouraging further inquiry, comparing him to Dr. Fauci in his alleged resistance to investigation. The speaker challenges Kash Patel to dispute the claims, asking him to confirm whether the plane truly came for routine servicing or for a discreet mission, and to disclose the truth about who was aboard and why they were in Provo, Utah.

A recently discovered video allegedly shows that the object that hit the World Trade Center on 9/11 was not a plane, but a Scud missile. The video was confiscated by the FBI, who concealed this information. The speaker accuses the government of being part of a cabal and claims that this video is the final piece of evidence contradicting the official 9/11 report. They mention a Swedish satellite that detected a different target, suggesting a cover-up. The speaker expresses frustration and accuses others of believing the lie.

According to the speaker, the Pentagon is the most heavily defended building in the world. The 9/11 Commission stated that Hani Hanjour, the alleged pilot of the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, was the worst pilot. Instructors wouldn't certify him to fly a single engine propeller plane. The speaker claims Hanjour supposedly flew a commercial jetliner, performed aerobatic maneuvers, and crashed it into the side of the Pentagon. The Pentagon had an active surface-to-air missile defense system and many security cameras. The FBI confiscated 80 to 90 videos of what hit the Pentagon but won't release them. The speaker concludes that 9/11 is the biggest lie of our lifetime.

"Candace is breaking on September 10 after Charlie's assassination." "An Egyptian Air Force plane flew out of Provo, Utah. Tail number, SUBTT." "Its first trip to America ever was made on July 20 to an army base in Nebraska." "the decision to murder Charlie Kirk in Utah was made around July 18." "A military meeting with foreign leaders took place on July 20 on US soil." "The plane flew into Provo direct from France on September 4 and stayed around or stayed until just after Charlie Kirk was assassinated, flying out of Williamston on that day." "The plane returned to Egypt the following day on September 11." "Things are not adding up here. This is a full scale military operation, and Candace is on point."

The discussion centers on how events escalated and a perceived parallel to the alleged “Dancing Israelis” on a moving truck during 9/11. Speaker 0 suggests that the alleged dancers may have viewed the outcome as America finally understanding what they had been suffering from over the prior 60 years, and as a way to end it. Speaker 0 also describes a “relief” feeling that the war might be over, but Speaker 1 shifts to a different point. Speaker 1 says an article was sent that debunked the Dancing Israelis claim as a “nothing burger.” Speaker 1 adds that a prominent figure who promotes the 9/11 narrative “crushes it.” Speaker 1 describes an alternative explanation: the individuals were Israelis who worked for a scam moving company, had gotten out of the IDF, were making money, and were there to document the event. In this account, anyone who saw the planes would take a picture, so the claim of foreknowledge used by others is rejected. Speaker 1 also addresses a claim that a video asserts foreknowledge, noting multiple vans. Speaker 0 responds by questioning why Mossad would send agents in a fake moving truck to watch what was already visible on the news, arguing that they could have seen it that way. Speaker 0 further claims that the story depends on timing and coincidence: the “exact three Mossad agents” in a city of about 8 million would have precisely run into law enforcement and been arrested. Speaker 1 reiterates that it is a “nothing burger” and says this was learned the previous week. Speaker 1 notes that people might object to their position, while also stating that they posted it on Twitter and pointed others to a broader “whole thing.” Speaker 1 then broadens the context by saying that there are many theories about major events, including October 7th, where some Israelis think it was an inside job, and that the larger issue is the rise of influencers and monetization, mentioning “audience captured” and referencing their own departure in connection with monetization and destructive/ideological actions they were prompted about.

The speaker discusses potential connections between Andrew Cobalt and Egypt, prompted by a subscriber’s tip related to Candace. The subscriber suggests there may be links worth Candace’s attention and promises screenshots and links below in the comments for others to investigate. The speaker references an article headlined “Egypt's president Sisi meets with US evangelical leaders for the first time in Cairo,” and reads a few key points from it, noting the quote is by Baptist pastor Turk Perkins. The article states that Turk Perkins was joined by evangelical activists and authors described as religious freedom activists and informal Trump adviser Johnny Moore, evangelical Joel Rosenberg, Egyptian-born Christian pastor and author Michael Youssef, and former Republican presidential candidate and former US congressman Michael Betzman. The speaker highlights Johnny Moore as the Trump adviser mentioned in the article and then shifts to the Kairos company. Kairos is described as being founded by Johnny Moore around 2015 as a boutique strategic communication PR firm. The discussion then moves to LinkedIn information about Andrew Kovolt (spelled Kovolt in the transcript), who is said to have been the vice president of communications for “the Cairo company” from August 2015, which would be near the company’s inception, until January 2019 when he allegedly moved to Turning Point. The speaker explicitly states he is not accusing Andrew Colvold (spelled Kovolt) of anything and that he is simply presenting information for others to consider. He adds that he does not know if the information is true or fact-checked, and emphasizes a general caveat: “Everybody's always innocent until proven guilty. Nothing here is a fact. This is all just allegedly.” The caller invites viewers to research further and share any connections they uncover between the Egyptian meeting, the Egyptian companies, and a scenario described as “an Egyptian plane flying with military contractors and kinda trailing Charlie Kirk all over the country and just happened to be in the same state at the same time and the same day that Charlie Kirk was assassinated.” The speaker requests comments with findings and suggests reaching out if anything bigger is discovered.

The transcript states that the voice of the hijacker on the hijacked planes’ voice recorder reveals that the accent of the hijacker matches an Israeli Hebrew accent. It then reports that FBI director Mueller, BBC News, and ABC have confirmed that seven of the 19 Muslims whose mugshots were flashed around the world did not die in the September 11 crashes; they are alive and well and are victims of identity theft. It adds that an eighth accused Muslim died one year before the September 11 hijackings even occurred. The speaker then asks who stole their identities and why the FBI isn’t looking for them. It questions if the hijackers really were Muslims, why they would steal the identities of fellow Muslims and implicate them, and suggests they would be more likely to steal Israeli identities and put the blame on Israelis. It further asks whether, if the hijackers were Israelis, they would be likely to steal the identities of Muslims and put the blame on Muslims.

The speaker claims that the witnesses who had a tape showing a Scud missile were silenced and the FBI concealed this information. They believe that the 9/11 report was a lie and that the Swedish satellite footage showing a market target was ignored. The speaker expresses frustration and calls for truth to prevail.

In Washington, people were discussing pushing toward a war against Iraq, with the attacks on 9-11 becoming a key trigger. Speaker 0 said that, after 9-11, Israel and the United States began preparing for war against Iraq immediately, and argued that 9-11 was used for that purpose. Speaker 0 stated unequivocally that “they used 9-11 for that purpose” and described this as “appalling” and “disgusting,” while also saying they were not claiming they staged 9-11 for that purpose. Speaker 1 said that well before 9-11 there were growing calls within Washington to engage in regime change in Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein, describing this as a neocon aspiration in Washington and also in Israel. Speaker 1 said 9-11 was then seized on to pursue those aims. Speaker 0 focused on why 9-11 has been debated for 25 years, describing the debate as revolving around foreknowledge and whether those responsible knew in advance and allowed it or staged it. Speaker 0 said they cannot answer those questions, but claimed the larger question was “conclusively answered”: that there was foreknowledge of 9-11. Speaker 0 asserted that the CIA knew the hijackers were in the United States, knew they were terrorists, and knew they were in place to commit acts of terror against the United States. Speaker 0 added a specific detail: people reportedly bet in public financial markets by shorting the airlines involved in 9-11 and the banks in the buildings taken down, making large profits. Speaker 0 said it has been known that these bets occurred, but that what “blew my mind” was that the U.S. government allegedly found the identities of those people who made the trades and withheld them. Speaker 0 said that to this day the identities have never been revealed, despite the trades being publicly traded, and claimed that whoever made the trades knew 9-11 was coming while the government protected those identities for 24 years.

Candace’s show highlighted two Egyptian state-owned jets and expanded on their movements around Provo, Utah, on September 10. The two aircraft are designated SUBND (s u bravo november delta) and SUBTT (s u bravo tango tango). These are not tourism jets; they are military government transport aircraft that normally land at major diplomatic or military hubs, not small regional airports. Their presence at Provo would require special US clearance and is highly unusual. Both jets arrived via Minot Air Force Base, America’s nuclear base, and one of the planes was on the ground for less than an hour for refueling before the next leg to Provo. The very next stop for both planes after leaving Minot was Provo. SUBND landed at Provo on 05/23/2025 and stayed until 09/14, a foreign state aircraft hanging out at a regional airport for nearly four months. SUBND also performed a straight corridor north of Provo and then back, a route analysts would call a mapping run, an electronic surveillance sweep, sensor calibration, or an intelligent flight conducted under special clearance. On September 14, SUBND finally left Provo for Goose Bay, Newfoundland, a NATO-linked location, and its departure from Provo was delayed by nearly nineteen hours after the scheduled time. On September 10, the day Charlie Kirk was shot, a USISR contractor jet appeared in the mix: Axle 10, a Bombardier Global 6500 operated by LeSai, owned by Leidos, a major military intelligence contractor tied to the Army’s Hades deep sensing program. Axle 10 made two extremely low passes—at about 210 feet to 300 feet above ground level—approximately three miles from the UVU campus in Provo. The two passes occurred at 09:15 AM and 12:48 PM local time, and both flights aligned tightly with the UVU corridor. At 13:08 UTC (07:08 AM local), Sue BTT began departure from Provo, and at the same minute Axle 10 appeared on FlightRadar in El Paso, Texas, for its departure, followed by a deep dip near UVU. Sue BND, the other Egyptian jet that had been idle in Provo since May 23, sent a handful of ground pings on September 10 but did not take off that day. Its pattern—months at Provo, then a September 10 pinging event—was unusual. The combination of these movements shows overlapping intelligence-grade activity in the air corridor associated with the Charlie Kirk incident, though no causal link or coordination is claimed. The speaker emphasizes that while this does not prove coordination, it provides verifiable and irregular flight data.

The speaker discusses a theory that a horrible event was falsely attributed to Muslims, when in fact it was carried out by a cunning and ruthless Israeli individual. They claim that this theory is not their own, but rather based on a US army report published the day before 9/11. The report allegedly warned about Israel's capabilities. The speaker invites criticism but emphasizes that this information comes from an official source.

The speaker discusses the theory that the missing MH370 plane may have been taken to the Diego Garcia military base. They mention evidence such as construction at the base, a potential CIA black site, witness testimonies, and similarities between crew members and the pilot on the base's Facebook page. The speaker also explores the possibility of advanced technology and espionage being involved in the disappearance. They suggest that the passengers may have been made deals with and that debris was thrown into the ocean to create the illusion of a crash. The speaker acknowledges that these are theories and not definitive proof.

The video discusses the issue of cell phone calls made by passengers on the hijacked airplanes during the 9/11 attacks. It questions the feasibility of making cell phone calls from cruising altitudes and high speeds. The video presents evidence that suggests the calls were not made from the airplanes, including discrepancies in the timing of the calls and the lack of background noise. The possibility is raised that the passengers were forced to make the calls under duress, pretending to be on the plane while already being landed in another location. The video concludes by stating that someone needs to explain where these calls actually came from.

The voice of the hijacker heard on the hijacked planes’ voice recorder is described as having an accent that matches an Israeli Hebrew accent. Seconds after that audio-related claim is mentioned, further transmissions are referenced in the narrative. FBI director Mueller, BBC News, and ABC are said to have confirmed that seven of the 19 Muslims whose mugshots were flashed around the world did not die in the nine one one crashes. The account states that these seven individuals are alive and well and are victims of identity theft. The transcript then raises attention to an eighth accused Muslim, stating that this person died one year before the nine one one hijackings even occurred. The transcript uses these points to introduce a series of questions about identity theft and investigative priorities. It asks who stole the identities of the mentioned individuals and why the FBI is not looking for the person or people responsible for the identity theft. It also focuses on the relationship between the alleged hijackers and the people whose identities were allegedly used. If the hijackers really were Muslims, the transcript asks why they would steal the identities of fellow Muslims and thereby implicate other Muslims. It questions whether, in that scenario, the hijackers would be more likely to steal Israeli identities and put the blame on Israelis rather than taking identities from Muslims. In the alternative scenario presented, the transcript asks whether the hijackers were Israelis, and if so, whether they would be more likely to steal the identities of Muslims and put the blame on Muslims. The transcript’s argument structure is centered on comparing these possible identity-theft targets—Israeli identities versus Muslim identities—against the stated identities attributed to the hijackers. Overall, the transcript links together three main elements: (1) the hijacker voice recorder claim about an Israeli Hebrew accent, (2) the confirmation that seven of the 19 Muslims shown in mugshots are alive and victims of identity theft, and (3) the additional claim that an eighth accused Muslim died one year before the hijackings. It then culminates in questions about the identity theft perpetrator, the lack of FBI pursuit as framed by the transcript, and the implications of who would target which identities depending on whether the hijackers were assumed to be Muslims or Israelis.

The speaker argues that there is overwhelming evidence that Egyptian planes regularly fly in and out of Israel. They state they will present that evidence tomorrow, expressing strong confidence in this claim: "these Egyptian planes are flying in and out." The speaker explains that by connecting people who were on those planes to other Egyptian planes, it became clear that these planes are flying in and out of Israel and turning their transponder off each time that they do it. This, the speaker says, now makes perfect sense of why there was mass panic. The speaker also notes a perception of an Egyptian lobby in the United States, suggesting that "these are the usual suspects that act if something is a threat to Israel." They criticize others for not being forthcoming and for gaslighting, adding, "they're trying to gaslight us" and "frankly just pissing me off." The speaker describes themselves as becoming locked in on these Egyptian planes and asserts, "If you keep pushing me and keep pushing me, I will become an expert on these planes. I'll learn how to build an Egyptian plane." Finally, the speaker reiterates their plan: "tomorrow, I will show you how these planes tie back to Israel."

The speaker questions how a 60-ton plane could navigate a difficult obstacle course. It's claimed the aircraft executed a 270-degree spiral before striking the Pentagon, despite the pilot's alleged incompetence. Doubts are raised about the official explanation that jet fuel vaporized the entire plane, including its Rolls Royce engines made of steel and titanium. Questions are posed about how bodies could be identified via fingerprints and DNA if the fire was hot enough to vaporize metal. One speaker states there was no evidence of a plane crash near the Pentagon, with only small, hand-sized pieces remaining. It's claimed government agents removed debris and covered the lawn with dirt and gravel. Security camera videos were confiscated by the FBI and have not been released. The speaker suggests the government would release the videos if they proved a 757 hit the Pentagon.

The Pentagon is heavily defended and the pilot who crashed into it, Hani Hanjour, was considered the worst pilot by the 911 commission. Despite being unable to fly a single engine propeller plane, he supposedly maneuvered a commercial jetliner to hit the Pentagon. The building had surface to air missile defense at the time. The FBI confiscated around 80 to 90 videos of the incident but has not released them. This video is the only available evidence. The speaker believes that 9/11 is a major lie.

Candace Owens: Shabbat shalom and Hanukkah wishes. Israel has a right to defend itself. Then she riffs about Tucker Carlson and TikTok, but shifts to recount of a four-and-a-half hour meeting with Turning Point USA, Erica, Justin Streiff, and others to address questions and concerns. Candace Owens: She emphasizes she invited Erica and others to answer questions, noting there were no rules in the room for that four-and-a-half hour session; the aim was to get clear answers and understand what Turning Point USA could or could not disclose. She describes the participants: Justin Streiff, Erica, George for part of it, her cousin Mia for vibes, and later George leaving. She explains her goal was to determine why Turning Point USA hadn’t answered basic questions and to address what she saw as miscommunications and lies. Candace Owens: Erica owned apparent lies or miscommunications early in the discussion, explaining that 650 employees can be emotional and that messages circulating on Twitter didn’t always reflect management’s communications. She references a prior interview with Glenn Beck and a viral clip about Charlie’s phone, clarifying Erica looked at Charlie’s iMessages and found he used Signal and Telegram, not regular texting. Andrew Kolbet (Kolbet) told her that Andrew did receive a message the night before the shooting saying “they’re going to kill me,” and she notes that Dan Flood received a similar message; she cautions about confirming the exact wording for Dan’s message. Candace Owens: She contends that some content from Barry Weiss’s interview was planned and not random, and that Barry Weiss asked questions that were directed; Erica said she knew the general idea but not the exact Candace Owens question. Candace maintains she did not recant her suspicions and lists concerns about specific Turning Point USA figures: Terrell Farnsworth allegedly lied about camera disruptions; Blake Neff and Mikey McCoy’s call logs were discussed, with Candace blaming Terrell’s actions and questioning the credibility of Tyler Boyer and Rob McCoy. She notes Rob McCoy does not work for Turning Point USA, contradicting the sense that he was “America’s pastor” at Memorial and that his Wikipedia entry had been updated accordingly. Candace Owens: She discusses the “magic bullet” and the texting around Charlie Kirk’s shooting. She recounts Andrew Kolbet’s claim that a surgeon stated the bullet should have gone through Charlie and could have killed those behind him; she emphasizes Andrew went to the surgeon and claimed permission to post but acknowledges questions about HIPAA. She notes investigators later indicated the surgeon didn’t know Andrew before the tweet, and that Kolbet’s post reflected an unverified account. Candace Owens: She describes the security around the event, the involvement of Brian Harpole in interviews (Sean Ryan) and a lack of certainty about whether he still works with Turning Point USA. She says that investigators are in an ongoing process, that no one from Turning Point USA or Erica has seen new evidence beyond what the public has, and that an May probable cause hearing will reveal concrete evidence. She criticizes media narratives that declare “the evidence is overwhelming” and argues for a cautious, transparent approach, acknowledging she had pressed for more concrete proof before publicly asserting involvement of specific individuals. Candace Owens: She reveals she asked for Mikey McCoy’s logs and confirms Mikey’s real name, sharing that Mikey called his wife first, then his father, and only later added Erica to the call, with subsequent calls involving his brother. She notes Blake Neff’s call with his mother and the timeline around the shooting, addressing discrepancies in various retellings and emphasizing the need for accuracy in call logs. Candace Owens: She mentions the Hamptons retreat and alleged lies, referencing Seth Dillon’s confrontation with Charlie Kirk and concerns about funding offers from BB Netanyahu to take Turning Point USA to the next level, which she says Erica denied knowing about, while noting multiple sources confirmed the offer. She clarifies she never asserted a $150,000,000 figure, only that there were discussions about taking Turning Point to the next level and that the offer’s gravity raises questions. Candace Owens: She returns to Egyptian planes, promising an upcoming interactive timeline on her site showing planes’ patterns and how they tie to Israel, arguing this is part of the broader pattern they are following. She notes that planes regularly fly in and out of Israel with transponders off, and she plans to present this evidence tomorrow, inviting scrutiny of those planes’ activity. Candace Owens: The segment ends with a tease about presenting the Egyptian planes evidence and transitions to sponsor mentions.