TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker presents a video of a suspect's roommate reading a text message allegedly sent at 6:17 AM. The text says, "I love you guys. I made some choices, I love you choices, and you guys don't know anything about this. You guys don't know anything about this. But I'm gonna be gone for a while." The text also says, "I don't wanna say anything more and implicate you in any way because you guys don't know anything about this." The speaker highlights the repetition of "You guys don't know anything about this" in the message. The text concludes with, "I love you guys, and I'm sorry for all the trouble this has caused." A journalist asks to see a photo of the phone screen. The roommate says reading the text is difficult for him. The speaker questions if the roommate knows more than he is saying, based on his nervousness and body language.

A man states he likes legal representation but has been denied it by police officers. He doesn't know what is happening, but mentions "killing a black guy." He asks if someone is with the president and states he works in the building. When asked if he was in the building at the time, he confirms he works there. He denies shooting presidents, claiming he is being taken in because he lives in Missouri. He then calls someone a Nazi and mentions the president.

The speaker admits to reporting the attorney general to the FBI without evidence of any criminal activity. When questioned about this, the speaker avoids directly answering and instead emphasizes their "good faith belief" that a crime had occurred. They also claim to have not collected any evidence after making the complaint. The questioning becomes tense as the speaker is repeatedly asked if they had any evidence to support their claims, but they continue to evade a direct answer.

The speaker is asked about a claim made by Steven Nayeroff, who said that when he was arrested, the FBI demanded information from him about various people, including the speaker. The speaker admits to not knowing anything about it until it came out publicly. They mention that there were many names on the list, but the press only focused on a few. The speaker reiterates that they had no knowledge of the situation.

"And, we all lost, no matter what side of the political aisle you're on, we lost something important in America today. But, the case goes on. The investigation goes on. There's a lot of piecing of evidence together. We don't have a shooter tonight. We have a couple leads, couple people that were released that probably aren't the shooter. They have a couple hot leads. There's a little bit of foreign intelligence. And I think over the next couple of days, we will learn a lot more, and hopefully, we will bring to justice the evil person who did what, they did to Charlie today. Yeah. I am hearing that they do have a couple of people of interest. That's the latest I heard from law That's correct. Law enforcement. You're hearing the same thing."

- "nobody's come forward with any pictures of the Dodge Challenger leading me to believe there is no Dodge Challenger." - "Maybe it's Tyler." - "Isn't this the famous intersection? No? Is there a back pathway that way?" - "Or does he turn here at this intersection at the LDS Mormon church, which means he would be on the LDS Mormon Church cameras, security cameras." - "Private property they say." - "This to me seems like something that I might have seen in a video or two where the cameras are removed and the FBI confiscates the cameras." - "Why did they do that? Why didn't they just publish all the video from the whole day?" - "There it is. There's the camera. I'm giving the camera a big salute, and you keep going that direction."

"you guys were basically stealing people's stuff and not paying them, and then he wound up murdered." "Also a great tragedy. He committed suicide." "I really do." "It looks like a suicide to me." "No. He was definitely murdered, I think. There were signs of a struggle, of course." "The surveillance camera, the wires had been cut." "Blood in multiple rooms; no indication at all that he was suicidal, no note, and no behavior." "Has there ever been a suicide where there's no indication at all that the person was suicidal who just ordered takeout food?" "Have you talked to the authorities about it?" "I have not talked to the authorities about it." "And his mother claims he was murdered on your orders." "I immediately called a member of congress from California, Ro Khanna, and said, this is crazy. You gotta look into this. And nothing ever happened." "The kid was clearly killed by somebody."

"And just last night, the suspect was taken into custody at 10PM local time in less than thirty six hours, 30 three to be precise." "For thirty three hours, I was I was praying that that if this had to happen here, that it wouldn't be one of us." "This thing is not commercial at all. It is most likely a surveillance drone and someone was flying it over the campus for a particular reason." "The main suspect in Kirk's killing is now Tyler Robinson and he is in custody." "This translates to approximately one in 2,000,000,000." "The FBI agents didn't even bother to show him the photos of the shooter for twelve hours." "Yes. Yes. So when he's first spotted on campus, he has different clothing on," "Look folks, it's very easy to just believe whatever we're being told, but we cannot afford to do that anymore."

And, we all lost, no matter what side of the political aisle you're on to, we lost something important in America today. But, the case goes on. The investigation goes on. We don't have a shooter tonight. We have a couple leads, couple people that were released that probably aren't the shooter. They have a couple hot leads. There's a little bit of foreign intelligence. And I think over the next couple of days, we will learn a lot more, and hopefully, we will bring to justice the evil person who did what, they did to Charlie today. I am hearing that they do have a couple of people of interest. That's the latest I heard from law enforcement. You're hearing the same thing.

"It's not my driveway. It's my aunt's driveway." "I parked there probably ten minutes before he walked by." "I had not seen this footage till just now." "This is his Ring camera." "the killer walked down that street nineteen minutes after you were there." "I believe it was 02:30 local time." "We got there probably about 01:45." "National Guard was going up and down the street." "there's maybe another suspect." "no information to suggest there's another suspect." "the first two that they arrested were released." "So I'm not suggesting there were two. I'm suggesting that the one that we thought was the one they had in custody was then released, and then the second one was released." "FBI was swarming that street when you went back to this location two hours later."

And, we all lost, no matter what side of the political aisle you're on to, we lost something important in America today. But, the case goes on. The investigation goes on. There's a lot of piecing of evidence together. We don't have a shooter tonight. We have a couple leads, couple people that were released that probably aren't the shooter. They have a couple hot leads. There's a little bit of foreign intelligence. And I think over the next couple of days, we will learn a lot more and hopefully, we will bring to justice the evil person who did what, they did to Charlie today. Yeah. I hope so. I am hearing that they do have a couple of people of interest. That's the latest I heard from law That's correct. Law enforcement. You're hearing the same thing.

The discussion centers on serious allegations involving a programmer who accused OpenAI of stealing people’s work and not paying them. The group notes that this programmer was murdered, with several participants presenting conflicting views on his death. Speaker 1 states that it was a great tragedy and that the programmer committed suicide, expressing a strong belief that it was suicide. In contrast, Speaker 0 describes the situation as clearly a murder, citing multiple troubling details and offering their personal conclusion that the programmer was killed. There is also any emphasis on the programmer’s public exposure. Speaker 2 notes that the programmer had been named four days earlier in the New York Times lawsuit and had just done an expose for the New York Times on how copyright issues with OpenAI were involved, specifically on the twenty-sixth, highlighting timing as very odd. The conversation touches on surveillance and investigative details. Speaker 3 claims there were multiple investigations and two police reports, but asserts that only one police report has been seen, alleging that in the first report the writer changed it, and that this is the second report; they claim the only one seen is the second report. The narrative then returns to the stated belief that the programmer was murdered. Speaker 0 lists signs of foul play: a struggle, surveillance camera footage, and wires cut. They detail that the programmer had just ordered takeout, had returned from a vacation with friends on Catalina Island, and that there was no indication of suicide. They note there was no note and no observed behavior suggesting suicide, and that the programmer was found dead with blood in multiple rooms, arguing that these factors make murder seem obvious. The question of whether authorities have been consulted is raised, with Speaker 0 asking if the authorities have been talked to about it. Throughout, Speaker 1 reiterates their belief in suicide by asking, “Do you think he committed suicide? I really do,” maintaining that position even after the murder narrative is presented. Speaker 1 confirms they have not discussed the matter with the authorities.

"Candace ain't lying, guys. I know it for a fact." "We all know that these narratives they're spinning out that they're putting out don't make any sense. They don't make any sense at all." "We don't know who killed him, why it was done, or how it was done." "None of us really know." "If you're actually believing what these people are telling us, you're cooked." "No. No. No. Look closer. It's it's yellow. What are you talking about?" "How do we best honor Charlie's death and legacy than figuring out who the hell killed him and why and how?" "There is absolutely something going on in that organization." "There was something going on prior to his assassination." "There's absolutely something going on right now, and they do not want us to know." "We fight to figure out what the hell it is they don't want us to know."

"There's a concern that there were agents of the government or assets of the government present on January 5 and January 6, during the protests." "I'm need afraid I can't see that at all." "Alright. You have you have those images there, and they're captioned. They were from January 5 and January 6." "As far as we can determine, the individual who was saying he'll probably go to jail, he'll probably be arrested, but he wants every but they need to go into the capital the next day, is then the next day directing people to the capital." "And as far as we can find, this individual has not been charged with anything." "One of the norms of the justice department is to not comment on impending investigations and particularly not to comment about, particular scenes or particular individuals." "So I'm not gonna violate this norm of, of of, the rule of law. I'm not gonna comment on an investigation that's ongoing."

A man states he wants legal representation, claiming police officers have not allowed him any. He says he doesn't know what is going on. An officer asks if he shot the president and if he was in the building at the time. The man confirms he works in the building, so naturally he was there. He claims he is being taken in because he lives in Missouri and that he is just a patsy.

And, we all lost, no matter what side of the political aisle you're on, we lost something important in America today. But, the case goes on. The investigation goes on. There's a lot of piecing of evidence together. We don't have a shooter tonight. We have a couple leads, couple people that were released that probably aren't the shooter. They have a couple hot leads. There's a little bit of foreign intelligence. And I think over the next couple of days, we will learn a lot more, and hopefully, we will bring to justice the evil person who did what, they did to Charlie today. Yeah. I hope so. I am hearing that they do have a couple of people of interest. That's the latest I heard from law That's correct. Law enforcement. You're hearing the same thing.

I'm suspicious of people who jump ahead to arrest, conviction, incarceration, or execution. Let’s start with an interview. I know a lot of people have been interviewed — hundreds, in the FBI context. In a federal investigation, it’s not crazy to call somebody; it happens every single day. It happened to every relative of every J-six prisoner — got called in, “Can we come talk to you?” That’s not weird. That’s the beginning of justice: the first step in finding out what happened, punishing the guilty, exonerating the innocent, is having these conversations in the context of a federal investigation, like an FBI interview. It’s strange to see television mentions that there’s no evidence to indict someone or to call a grand jury. Why not just ask questions of the FBI? If they’re not doing that, you wonder why. Now, here’s the bigger picture you’re qualified to provide, even if I’m not. The implication in this file dump is that there are basically religious rituals, sexual in nature. That’s very common through history — temple prostitutes for a reason. There are rituals involving children underway in the United States and the West, rich and powerful people sexually abusing young people. That is very hard for a lot of people to believe or metabolize, but it feels like that’s not totally crazy; it happens. Does that happen? Absolutely. It’s so dark that it’s hard for average people — regular people just trying to live their lives — to even approach it. Even a maniac cannot put himself in the shoes of someone so depraved. Regular Americans can’t even put themselves in the shoes of a millionaire, let alone a billionaire, because they’re just trying to pay their bills and can’t — while billionaires are doing certain things that are messing everything up. So, it’s far removed from regular experience, but it’s hard to understand and believe. There’s good evidence of elements of that in various fringe investigations for a long time. I don’t say “fringe” to mean unreliable; I mean fringe to say they never gain traction with mainstream media, for whatever reason. But it’s right there in these emails and these files. It’s not entirely clear what all of it means, but there are very overt references, covert references, and mounting because people are still digging through them. These are millions of files with no effective way to sort through them the way the DOJ released them. So the evidence is mounting that we have: people turning a blind eye (reprehensible), adjacent and complicit, directly complicit, people that venture into the demonic or the truly depraved, and so on.

The speaker repeatedly questions why the FBI is always referenced for information. They press the other speaker, who claims to have communicated with the FBI, about details of an investigation. Despite being asked about shell casings and explosives, the speaker deflects, insisting on referring to the FBI for answers. The questioning becomes more intense, with accusations of withholding information and covering up. The speaker continues to evade direct answers, emphasizing the ongoing criminal investigation.

Speaker 0 pressed: 'Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?' Speaker 1 responded: 'I have never spoken to president Trump about the Epstein files.' Speaker 1: 'The attorney general and I have had numerous discussions about the entirety of the Epstein files and the reviews conducted by our team.' Speaker 1: 'And we have released where president Trump's name is the files.' Speaker 1: 'During many conversations that the attorney general and I have had on the matter of Epstein, we have reviewed' Speaker 0: 'Question is simple.' Speaker 0: 'Who' Speaker 0: 'Did you tell the attorney general that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files? Yes or no?' Speaker 1: 'Why don't you try spelling it out' Speaker 0: 'Yes or no? Use' Speaker 0: 'the alphabet.' Speaker 0: 'Yes or no?' Speaker 1: 'No. A b c.' Speaker 0: 'Question has been asked and answered.' Speaker 0: 'You've not answered it, and we will take your evasiveness as a consciousness of guilt.'

- "And, we all lost, no matter what side of the political aisle you're on to, we lost something important in America today." - "But, the case goes on." - "The investigation goes on." - "There's a lot of piecing of evidence together." - "We don't have a shooter tonight." - "We have a couple leads, couple people that were released that probably aren't the shooter." - "They have a couple hot leads." - "There's a little bit of foreign intelligence." - "And I think over the next couple of days, we will learn a lot more and hopefully, we will bring to justice the evil person who did what, they did to Charlie today." - "I am hearing that they do have a couple of people of interest." - "That's the latest I heard from law" - "That's correct." - "Law enforcement." - "You're hearing the same thing."

There is reason for people to believe that this is a professional hit job. John Salmon is an excellent reporter, and Steven Crowder has some leaked information. I want to talk about both. I want to begin by saying that I'm very, very close with Charlie and his team, and here is the thing that I wish to relay to you from them: that there is some considerable evidence that there were state actors involved here. That's it. I don't want to go any further than that. I can't go any further than that. That is all I've that is what I've been told. It is not like this is exclusive to me necessarily. John Solomon said it last night on Sean Hannity's show. Here we go. There's a sense that we all lost something important in America today, but the case goes on. The investigation goes on. There's a lot of piecing of evidence together. We don't have a shooter tonight. We have a couple leads, a couple people that were released that probably aren't the shooter. They have a couple hot leads. There's a little bit of foreign intelligence. And over the next couple of days, we will learn a lot more, and hopefully, we will bring to justice the evil person who did what, they did to Charlie today.

- I recognized an individual and 'have taken down the cameras minute four after Charlie was shot? The back camera of all the ones when you take the front camera.' - 'I've never seen that. He's never been behind me at an event. He's never been lingering around me at an event.' - I asked about 'his presence behind Charlie' and 'the mysterious phone call ... minute three after Charlie was assassinated.' - He told me explicitly that 'they were trying something new that day. Like, it was something new. Charlie's super ambitious. And on the AV thing, they were trying something new, and they wanted to be able to feed it back instantly to Arizona.' - 'None of it makes sense to me because these events are typically livestreamed. But again, something new. Okay?'

The speaker is asked about a claim made by Steven Nayeroff, who said that when he was arrested, the FBI demanded information from him about various people, including the speaker. The speaker states that they were not aware of this until it came out, and upon looking into it, they noticed that there were many names on the list. The press only focused on a few well-known individuals. The speaker confirms that they have no knowledge about the situation.

"So the question was, have we spoken to the shooter's parents, and if there were any red flags that may have been missed?" "I know there were dozens of interviews that have been conducted, with relatives, friends, associates of the shooter, as well as people, obviously, witnesses that were present at the scene yesterday." "I know we have not been successful in, talking to the shooter's mother yet at this time, but there there continue to be efforts, made to get that done." "So you have talked to the father? I I cannot confirm that." "I just I don't know. There's been We have been listening to"

"I thought the feds were saying they were looking for a bullet at some point, which is now very alarming to me. I don't understand that. How could they have been looking for a bullet? Because if I'm not seeing, and there isn't. I'm telling you, what happens in the front is not what happens in the back at all." "If I'm not seeing any blood, what what are we to take from that? The only thing that could make sense if what they're saying is true and that person took the shot from the place that they are saying that individual took the shot from, it would suggest that it it's a it it was inside of Charlie. Right? And they would know that. The feds would have known that." "So they would have communicated that they were never looking for a bullet."