TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker claims the media covers up violence by Antifa and ignores violence against Trump supporters. The speaker says that after a White House press briefing, they asked assembled journalists why they wouldn't cover violence against Trump supporters or demand that Democratic leaders disavow violence from Antifa, as they demanded of Trump regarding his supporters. The speaker states the journalists laughed at them, which the speaker took as proof that the media laughs at violence against people they don't like.

"Can you clarify what kind of protest, president Trump does support or find acceptable?" "President absolutely supports peaceful protest." "He supports the first amendment." "He supports the right of Americans to make their voices heard." "He does not support violence of any kind." "He does not support assaulting law enforcement officers who are simply trying to do their job." "It's very clear for the president what he supports and what he does not." "Unfortunately, for Democrats, that line has not been made clear, and they've allowed this unrest and this violence to continue, and the president has had to step in." "What question?" "So if there were peaceful protests on Saturday for the militant parade, president Trump would allow that?" "Of course, the president supports peaceful protests." "What a stupid question. Raquel."

"Talk to me about the environment in which a shooting like this happens." "we don't know any of full details of this. We don't know if this was the supporter shooting their gun off in celebration or so. We have no idea about this." "He's been one of the most divisive, especially divisive, figures in this who is constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech or sort of aimed at certain groups." "I always go back to hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions." "And I think that's the environment we're in, that people just you can't stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying these awful words and not expect awful actions to take place." "And that's the unfortunate environment we're in."

The speaker argues that "The Black Lives Matter organization show up in Washington DC to protest the National Guard being in Washington DC who is currently helping police in Washington DC get crime under control and this crime being black people unalive and other black people. Majority of it that is." They claim "they believe that it is targeting black communities, threatening civil liberties even though the goal is to lower crime." The speaker repeats "Stupid is as stupid does. But are they really stupid? No. They're not stupid." They note "They're getting low on funds, and they need you to, you know, give a little bit." They warn that "If it happens again in Washington DC, then they'll blame Trump for it instead of blaming the black lives they claim to matter who actually burnt up the city." They add that "Since the National Guard has been deployed, there have been no homicides, people can safely walk down the street with ice around their neck and nice watches. Walking"

Speaker 0 says, "If you're celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk, you're a bad person. You're going to hell." Speaker 1 adds, "May. Fuck Charlie Kirk," and declares, "The off ramp to the high road is closed," insisting they won't feel guilty about a "bullshit hero" who spread harm. They stress, "This has nothing to do with conservative versus liberal" or with Democrats versus Republicans, and point out the alleged suspect is "an old white guy." They predict media will misframe the event as "an isolated incident by a lone shooter" and that "it's gonna end up being a white guy." They acknowledge sadness with "Abso fucking lutely," but conclude, "However, fuck that guy. God’s timing is always right." "Good day, goofies."

Speaker 0 describes ongoing activity in Minneapolis involving collecting information on ICE whereabouts and telegraphing it to protesters, urging people to come and back them up, including outside a donut shop. The second screen is shown with details: an incident outside Glam Doll Donuts at the Black Forest Inn parking lot on Nicolette Avenue where Alex Preti attempted to film the Border Patrol arrest that was taking place and ended up dead. He notes a call for black backup at the Black Forest Inn parking lot. Observers urgently requested a Glam Doll Donuts, the location where the “Pretty incident” occurred. An observer had been shot by ICE, with unknown condition, and EMTs were present. The speaker emphasizes that people are being urged to actively get out there, and warns that if someone protests or interferes with an ongoing law enforcement operation, there can be horrible consequences. Speaker 1 responds by saying that there should always be decrying of the loss of human life and that they do not want situations like the ones seen in Minneapolis. He asserts that all the blame is being directed at federal law enforcement officers carrying out their legal duties, while part of the responsibility lies with groups that are conspiring to obstruct federal law enforcement, which he characterizes as a crime. He contends they are contributing to the rise in violence in Minneapolis, and asserts that the obstruction of federal law enforcement is illegal. He argues that the Trump administration should not pull back and should not allow a message to be sent that such conspiring, use of funds, and obstruction of federal law enforcement can succeed, because that would undermine federal law enforcement throughout the country.

Speaker 0: Listen to this clip, Hannah, of what I said that was so dangerous and controversial. K. Keen Jeffries, a progressive congressman, literally tweeted, while the trial was going on, lock up Kyle Rittenhouse and throw away the key. And he's the same guy that rails against mass incarceration, and I agree with him on some of it. But now, before the trial's even over, they're calling for this guy to be locked up and throw away the key. Like, they've already reached their conclusion. Speaker 1: No. Didn't give him a fair shake. Speaker 0: It's a very ... And they lied about it being a white supremacy thing when it's a white dude that shot three other white people. It's the entire thing is bizarre and it's Out of self defense. Speaker 1: Right. Yes. Speaker 0: In my opinion. Speaker 1: That's most important. Speaker 0: The truth is he defended himself; he wasn't some mass shooter white supremacist, and he should be acquitted. Do you feel bullied? Speaker 1: I I don't. And honestly, I think that was the most milquetoast explanation of everything that went down.

The following story contains graphic footage of violence. A white gunman opened fire Tuesday night on people protesting the police shooting of unarmed black man Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The attack was carried out by a teenage white vigilante. Somebody white male. The white boy. White supremacist. Terrorist. He murdered protesters. I didn't do anything wrong. I defended myself. What we saw is white male privilege and white male entitlement. That white supremacist patriarchy. A system of white supremacy. The only reason why any of this is allowed is because of the whiteness of it all. Very white nationalist. White vigilante. White fear. White privilege. I didn't wanna have to kill anybody that night. Oh, baloney. White tears. I have nightmares every night. And what is the nightmare? It's just reliving the events of what happened. These are scenes playing out in a small city in America's Midwest.

"I don't know who did this. And I sure hope that it was not from the left that would be better." "But it doesn't matter because the first Trump assassination also was not from the left." "It was just a guy who was going to also had Biden on his target list." "And it's been made in the ideology of this far right that you're seeing online." "It's part of a line, Brett Kavanaugh, Trump assassination, how Charlie Kirk," "It doesn't matter that it wasn't from the left because that part has been erased in the common litany of grievances." "Absolutely." "I mean, it's just it's just about the, momentum of violence. Right?" "If one side keeps punching, that's bad, that's really bad." "But it's much worse when one side punches, the other punches back." "That causes an escalation."

My sympathy to Charlie Kirk's family and to Charlie Kirk who obviously is, you know, become a target for somebody. I don't know whether it's political violence because I don't know who did it. I know they seem to have somebody in custody. But I will say that political violence unfortunately has been ratcheting up in this country. We saw the shootings, the killings in Minnesota. We've seen other political violence occur in other states, and I I would just say it's gotta stop. And I think there are people who are fomenting it in this country. I think the president's rhetoric often foments it. We've seen the January 6 rioters who clearly, you know, have tripped a new era of political violence.

Speaker 0: Hey, yo. Stop scrolling for one second for me. Give me just one second. Look, we were not there to figure out who killed Kennedy. We were not there to figure out who killed King, but we did figure out one thing. That this dude right here look. This guy right here running, you see him running? That is the guy that took out Kurt. That's the guy. That's him right there. Speaker 1: If speech is violence, then some are bound to conclude that violence is justified to stop speech. And we're not gonna let that be justified.

Speaker 0 says, “They doing too much, man, and they keep pushing people. You know?” Speaker 1 erupts, “Oh, shit. What the fuck? They killed my did they fucking kill that guy? Are you fucking kidding me, dude? Not again. Are you fucking kidding me? That guy's dead. Yo. We need people on”

The speaker expresses concern over extreme rhetoric surrounding Trump, linking it to recent violence. They call for an end to hyperbolic statements from all elected officials. Another speaker mentions Trump's strong criticism of Biden. Both emphasize the need to calm down and address the dangerous escalation of rhetoric to prevent further violence. They stress the importance of leaders tamping down on inflammatory language to avoid inciting more violence.

Speaker 0 expresses concern about the administration’s response to the incident, noting that very quickly, very high up people, including Christine Ohm, Donald Trump himself, and Shady Vance, started calling the killed woman a domestic terrorist and saying she deserved it. The speaker argues that when a relatively young mother of three is killed by a law enforcement officer, government officials should say this was a tragedy, that they will conduct an investigation, and they will see what happened, instead of “running cover for the officer,” because such conduct erodes public trust. The speaker emphasizes that many things about the response freaked people out and describes it as disturbing to have people calling the woman a domestic terrorist. The question is raised: “What the fuck does that even mean?” The speaker notes that even if she did try to run the officer over, it’s not terrorism, and questions what people are talking about when they use that label. There is a critique of how words like “terrorist” are used loosely and how they have “lost meaning,” with the speaker asserting that this is the kind of rhetoric that is used to paint people in certain ways. The speaker draws a comparison, suggesting that labeling someone a terrorist resembles tactics used against Palestinians, where everyone is painted as a terrorist. The rapid labeling is described as part of a broader pattern of invoking terrorism to justify actions or narratives. The speaker concludes with a conditional reflection: if someone is a terrorist, then “actually anything goes,” signaling a perception that the label is being used to bypass normal standards or accountability.

The speakers are debating the former president's statements about an "enemy within." One speaker claims the former president suggested turning the American military on the American people. A clip is played of the former president responding to accusations of threatening people, stating he is not threatening anyone, but that "they" are the ones doing the threatening through "phony investigations" and "weaponization of government." The other speaker objects, asserting the clip does not reflect the former president's repeated statements about the American people being the "enemy within." This speaker claims the former president has talked about turning the American military on the American people, going after peaceful protestors, and locking up those who disagree with him, which they argue is unacceptable in a democracy.

Speaker 0 argues that “they are not here to cause safety in this city” and that “what they are doing is not to provide safety in America.” They claim those actions are “causing chaos and distrust,” and that such actions are “ripping families apart,” and “sowing chaos on our streets,” adding that in this case they are “quite literally killing people.” The speaker contends that the opposing side has already begun to frame the incident as an action of self-defense, and, after having seen the video themselves, states directly that this portrayal is “bullshit.” They insist that the situation does not reflect self-defense but rather that “this was an agent recklessly using power that resulted in somebody dying, getting killed.”

A speaker described an incident involving 100 black people beating up two white people, stating that if the races were reversed, the situation would be viewed differently. They criticized the lack of law enforcement presence and expressed concern for the injured woman, a single mother, and the perceived lack of accountability for the perpetrators, who they believe will receive lenient treatment in prison. Another speaker questioned whether justice could be served and suggested federal involvement. They lamented the societal trend of filming and posting violent acts on social media instead of helping victims. Another speaker echoed this sentiment, noting that only one person called for help. They criticized the police chief's response, calling it disrespectful, and mentioned a lawsuit against the chief by four white lieutenants alleging discrimination in promotions.

The election was totally fraudulent as we all knew. 100% it was stolen. January 6 was just, you know, mom and dad who were mad about what they saw to be an election that they thought was unfair. During 02/2020, rioters caused about $3,000,000,000 worth of damage and killed about two dozen people over the course of eight months. This is David Dorn in his very last moments on Earth. He's a former police captain protecting a store. I happen to believe that a lot of the ways they treated rioters that were left wing. Kamala Harris was working to help the instigators, the criminals, get out of jail. Giving the narrative that there's no consequences for acts of violence even on federal grounds, cases being dropped from the federal siege in Portland by leftist rioters. I believe that was part of setting a narrative to gaslight the right wing into thinking that they could riot too and get away with it. This is mostly a protest. It is not, generally speaking, unruly. Show me where it says that protest was supposed to be polite and peaceful. Peaceful protest. Peaceful protesters. Too many see the protest as the problem. No. The problem is what forced your fellow citizens to take to the streets.

I wanna address this idea that both sides just need to lower the temperature. If you've been watching the news or scrolling on social media, you've probably heard this. Both sides just need to lower the temperature. It's bullshit, and I wanna point out exactly why it's bullshit. First, let's take a look at what these Democrat politicians are saying now that their side has committed many acts of domestic terrorism. They say: “Everybody, right, left, center, I don't care what your politics are, has to speak out strongly against it. But look, I think, and I don't know what's happened here, and I don't know about the guns, but we need better laws on guns.” Then: “I I I just don't even know why there aren't uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be.” And: “There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives. Enemies of the state.” They add: “Show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful.” They state: “There is no both sides in this. Okay? That is what the left has done over about the last week.” They list alleged incidents: “A leftist murdered Charlie Kirk. A leftist shot an ABC affiliate for not airing Jimmy Kimmel. Imagine shooting up a TV studio because Jimmy Kimmel was not being aired. Somebody on the left shot a wedding while yelling free Palestine. Leftists had mass celebrations and celebrated Charlie Kirk's murder in the streets of New York. And today, a leftist shot an ICE facility.” They conclude: “There is no both sides.” “The right is not the one doing this. The far left, the leftist organizers, activists, the people at the root of the Democratic Party are the ones behind this. They have an insane ideology, and they are making people pay for it in blood.”

Speaker 1: "Just because the other side... jokes about the bad things that happened to them, I don't think that makes it okay for us to turn around and do the same." Speaker 0: "No. We need to stop... the left just haven't cucked out enough." Speaker 0: "Trump is fucking insane because he has support from 90% of the conservatives in the Republican party who are entirely un American." Speaker 1: "One person is dead... a swing state voter." Speaker 1: "We don't know what the motivation of the shooter was." Speaker 1: "Just because there is fire burning doesn't give us leave to throw more wood on it." Speaker 0: "Donald Trump wanted absolute criminal immunity." Speaker 0: "Democracy only works when everybody participates." Speaker 1: "I reject this framing entirely."

"Do you accept, Carrie, that this is a it's not just a one-sided problem? The political violence and violent rhetoric is a problem on both sides of the divide, and it's incumbent on everybody in a position of authority and influence to take the lead here in trying to to just tone things down." "There's been a few cases where it goes from from the right to the left, but there's been an exorbitant number where it's coming from the left to the right. And you can't deny that. If you add it all up, it's just more violence. I mean, president Trump was nearly assassinated. There's another attempt on his life." "The media has to take credit for what they have caused, the chaos they've caused in our country, and they haven't done it. And until they do, they need to be turned off, canceled, muted. They're absolutely abhorrent."

Warning: the following story contains graphic footage. A white gunman opened fire Tuesday night on people protesting the police shooting of unarmed Black man Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The attack was carried out by a teenage white vigilante. The shooter is described as a white supremacist, terrorist, and white nationalist. He murdered protesters. "I didn't do anything wrong. I defended myself." The speakers cite "white privilege" and "white male entitlement" as motives, calling it "the white supremacist patriarchy" and "a system of white supremacy." They describe "This little murderous white supremacist" and label it "mass murder." Phrases include "White vigilante," "White fear," "White privilege," "I didn't wanna have to kill anybody that night," and "White tears" with "White male tears." The piece ends: "These are scenes playing out in a small city in America's Midwest."

The speaker claims to possess video footage, not available to public media, showing Kyle Rittenhouse with an AK-47 shooting three people in the back.

Speaker 1: "The narrative that they have pushed forward in the last ten years is that there is a relentless assault on against black people be on behalf of white people, and the data does not show that." Speaker 1: "White individuals are actually more likely to be attacked, especially even per capita, by black individuals in this country." Speaker 3: "it's just pure race race mongering, hate mongering. It's wrong." Speaker 3: "Where is the George Floyd policing act? It didn't pass." Speaker 0: "The media doesn't care about this, and we should start asking why." Speaker 1: "All of a sudden, when we make the left live up to their own standard of rules, there is complete silence by the entire American media."

The speaker discusses protests in New York City where participants chanted: “Christy Noem will hang.” The speaker notes Christy Noem is the secretary for homeland security and says Democrats are “out en masse” saying she will hang. They also chant “save a life, kill an ICE,” and the speaker states this amounts to talking about killing ICE agents. The speaker argues that this demonstrates a permission structure for violence and that the left is openly encouraging violence against ICE agents and cabinet members of the president. The speaker says it will be interesting to see how many Democrats condemn these actions. The speaker asserts that the left has a problem with political violence and that it is visible “more and more.” They claim this is unacceptable and criticize the left for portraying themselves as more virtuous and morally superior, describing this behavior as inconsistent with that portrayal. The speaker emphasizes the need to call this out and to raise awareness about what they view as the violence being promoted by the left. Additionally, the speaker promotes a free email newsletter, stating that it is sent every morning around 7 AM Central. They mention that the link to subscribe is in their profile and urge viewers to drop their email and subscribe. The segment ends with the speaker noting they will see the audience in the next update.