Who Really Killed Charlie Kirk? Truth Behind Kirk Assassination w/ Myron Gaines & Ryan Matta
BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO SUPPORT THE SHOW - https://castbrew.com/ Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com Host: Tim Pool @Timcast (everywhere) Phil @Philthatremains (X) Guest: Myron Gaines @MyronGainesX (everywhere) Ryan Matta @RyanMattaMedia (X) Producers: Lisa Elizabeth @LisaElizabeth (X) Kellen Leeson @KellenPDL (X) My Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnews Podcast Channel - https://www.youtube.com/TimcastIRL Who Really Killed Charlie Kirk? Truth Behind Kirk Assassination | The Culture War with Tim Pool
It has been 16 days since Charlie Kirk was assassinated.
And you know, I'll just throw my cards out there.
I I I largely believe what we're getting from the FBI is correct, though there are a lot of questions about it because look, we're not children.
You don't need to just blindly believe everything the government tells you.
But when we break down all of the theories running wild, I think the simple narrative that we are getting tends to be the correct one, but there are a lot of unanswered questions, even if you do believe the work of Cash Dan and Pam Bondi, there are questions about how could this have been a loan shooter?
How could people have had foreknowledge posting on social media seemingly knowing this was going to happen?
Because of these things, because of ballistics, there have been dozens of videos which have cracked millions of views, claiming new evidence, new conspiracies, trap doors, cement being poured, palm guns, a man hiding in the bushes.
What is true?
Well, we don't really know for sure, but we're gonna discuss it, debate it, break it down, and have a general conversation over uh why people are saying the things they're saying.
But I'll just start with this, just so you guys know my position.
I want to make sure it's clear.
There's a lot of money be money to be made in a lot of these narratives.
And I think if you came out and said we don't actually know, well, for the most part, people aren't gonna click that video.
But if you make a video titled, Who Really Killed Charlie Kirk?
The truth behind the Kirk assassination, maybe people will click that one, which is what we titled this video.
But I think it's because I actually want to uh take a look at all of this stuff.
Some of these videos I believe are easily debunked, which is really frustrating to see six million views on a video where within three seconds, with no, I'm not trying to be a dick, but the dude contradicts his own argument.
So I think it's important that we can break this down, have this conversation.
Before we get started, my friends, we got a great sponsor.
It's Bearskin.
You know we love bear skin.
These are great and amazing hoodies.
You guys have seen them.
I wear them on the show periodically.
It's starting to get a little cool again, so we'll probably start wearing them.
Smo smart people right now, they're locking in their winter gear because this is the best time to prep for coming winter.
You buy it before it gets cold, right?
Bear skin is running a 60% off deal right now, but only if you get your hoodie early.
The hoodie is built like a tank, 340 GSM microfleece, 10 pockets with a clean rugged fit.
It looks great.
Plus it zips right into a heavy storm rain jacket to become 100% waterproof when you need it.
So if it gets cold, wet and windy, you're not scrambling at the last minute.
You'll get free shipping in the US fast delivery, and you've locked in your winter gear early, so win-win.
Do yourself a favor and text Tim to 36912 and lock in your 60% off.
Again, that's Tim to 36912.
You'll get a link straight to your phone so you can check it out whenever you whenever you want.
Maybe you're busy right now.
Don't wait till you're freezing.
Go to B A E R dot skin slash Tim.
You can get up to 60% off.
Shout out, thanks for sponsoring the show.
Don't forget, my friends, smash that like button, share the show right now.
We got a couple of guests uh joining us to talk about the uh talk about all this.
So uh let me just pull up this story first, and we're gonna start with some of these theories.
Uh I also want to stress that I uh any information we don't have, as we're basically trying to do a deep dive on all this stuff, comments, rant and chat if you have any any information you want us to pull up and look at, and we'll take a look at this and we will try to assess it and we'll uh we'll break all this down.
Let me actually start by saying this, what we think we know.
And I say that because the investigation is ongoing, and I don't think I I think a lot of people are trying to claim the FBI's lying to us and all that.
And I'm uh no, I I think Cash has been as honest as he can be.
I mean, he's uh working into a degree in intelligence, so he can't just leak all this information, especially if they're building a case.
But I believe we are getting pretty much as close to the real story from the feds.
I also think it's fair to point out, even Cash has stated they're looking at every angle.
They're looking at possible other shooters.
Any information or tips that people have there trying to figure this one out same as everybody else.
But we've got a the official story that we have now is there is a man who was accused of shooting Charlie Kirk.
He was on a roof with a bolt Action 30 out six.
He was motivated by the hatred spread by Charlie, according to this official stair uh story, and he shot Charlie in the neck right around the time that Charlie was answering a question about trans mass shooters.
This individual was seen limping on a on a on a private cam uh security camera towards the uh UVU.
He was seen on video on the roof fleeing after the shot was taken, apparently holding something that appears to be a gun.
The bullets is reported by the feds had engravings on it with memes and messages.
And this individual had a long conversation with his transgender boyfriend, basically saying, Here's why I did it, and you know, here's what I was doing.
Now there are questions that people have that I think are warranted, such as the ballistics, which I think can be answered.
I think certainly people who are tracking ballistics are making interesting points, but I think there's a lot of people that are jumping the gun and saying outright, oh, it's not possible.
It's not possible.
Well, it is possible.
And we'll get to that stuff in the in the greater conversation.
But as to the story that we have so far, everyone has questioned the conversation between the boyfriend and the alleged shooter because it reads very scripted.
At the bare minimum, it's transposed because it's not a single typo.
Uh Matt Walsh has suggested that the boyfriend was involved, and this message was to create reasonable doubt in a potential court hearing.
There's also other information, this is confirmed.
The FBI is investigating Discord chats and other potential groups, these these queer and trans rifle groups, because they were at least there were seven accounts online that had foreknowledge or presented information that appeared to show foreknowledge of the assassination plot, indicating it's likely not a lone wolf.
But that being said, before we dive into some of these conspiracy theories, we'll just throw it to you guys and uh I'll ask you guys what you think is going on.
Yeah, so I think we got a lot of mis uh guided stories from the FBI and from our government and then from the mainstream media.
It seems like that they're using the media to basically present and push out a narrative, and then once we tear apart that narrative, they're coming back and saying, Oh, wait, there was no official FBI statement.
So I think we should start at the very beginning.
And the first big break in the story, I think was when Blake Bednars went through all the footage and he realized he said, Hey, the people in the cafeteria, and I showed this to Myron on the way here.
You can see the people that in the cafeteria that filmed the video of the man running across the roof, right?
At that exact point that they're that the that they're filming that, you're seeing the crowd out there scrouching down.
So I then I go outside and I go, okay, let's start a video at the exact moment that Charlie gets shot.
And I go, I'm gonna press play and you're gonna hear bang.
And then we count one one thousand, two one thousand.
And I'm also using the timer on the computer to uh from the video thread.
It's three seconds from the time that Charlie shrugs from the time that that shot goes off to the time that crowd's sitting down.
So then you go back to the camera on the inside and you see the man running on the roof is in a full sprint within three seconds of Charlie being shot, 100% fact.
We know whoever that man was on the low C building on that roof is in a full sprint with or without his rifle in hand within three seconds.
So then I hired uh a journalist to go back to the crime scene and actually film.
I wanted to see the video, the camera, the CC TV footage that was used at the that the FBI gave us.
So the FBI gives us the footage which is time stamped on the date and time at 1223.34 it starts.
So at 34, it starts, and you see him running across the roof.
Okay, so three seconds prior to that video footage that the FBI gave us would have shown this man laying in the prone position and taking that shot.
So I'm not trying to push any narrative.
I'm saying at the very least, what I want is just 10 seconds, 15 seconds longer of the video that you've already gave us.
Then he went back to that crime scene, and there's not only one CCT camera there, there's two cameras, and I showed this to Myron as well.
I just want to clarify that when you're when you're discussing the three seconds, are you referring to device timestamps or are you saying regardless of the time at it was in the video, it was three seconds.
I'm saying in the video in the cafeteria, he's running on the roof.
You see that.
And then you see the crowd scrubbed scrouting down.
The crowd in that video just realized Charlie had been shot.
So then I went to the outside video and I'm watching and I watched the shot go off, and you hear bang, and I go, okay, I'm just watching the timestamp on the video, how long it takes the crowd to actually start scrouching down.
Okay, so you're a sniper, you're laying on the roof, you take this shot, and somehow you magically are up in a full sprint with the rifle in hand within three seconds.
Uh you have you guys ever seen the Mythbusters thing where they test uh uh a knife versus a gun, and it's like at 21 yards, you can stab a guy before he can draw on you.
Oh, they teach when I was in the academy, and for the audience that doesn't know, he used to be an agent with uh Homeland Screen Investigations, they would show you that stuff all the time uh to trade to train you like, hey, if someone has a knife, you need to get your gun out as quickly as possible because they could close the distance.
Yeah, this so then Candace goes, yeah, two days ago, she went and tracked down the the very first video of the guys that are kind of walking up and they go, Hey, is there somebody on that roof up there?
Okay, so in there in that video, they're going, man, the guy just ran across.
Is he already in position?
So Candace went and got the timestamp of that video.
That's at 1222.
So this man runs across the roof.
This is what we know.
This is just the evidence that we've been presented, right?
The man runs across the roof, gets into prone position, takes the shot and fires the shot within one minute, and then within three seconds is in a full sprint off that roof.
And there's two cameras that the FBI has, two CC TV videos that we know that they have.
Yep, and that's all I'm asking for.
Is you guys want to prove this narrative, then it's so simple.
Just release the video that shows him taking that shot and getting up and grabbing his rifle.
They don't show you where he's there and takes the shot, right?
So I'm like, why did you guys not show us that so that we can like literally see him taking a shot, getting up, running across, so that we know he's a shooter.
But when you got a case of this type of magnitude where you know you have an enormous uh burden of of you know bearing some type of public trust uh and people are asking questions, and obviously Cash Patel is like, look, I'm gonna try to be the most transparent FBI.
Um they should release that.
And what I will also say is that I think it's important that we understand that he was charged by the state, which means since he was charged by the state, it's actually the uh Utah law enforcement locals that are running the case.
I'm the case agent and Patel is the director, right?
You're in a position, you're in a weird spot because this is a huge case.
The people want to know what's going on.
We already know that no one trusts the FBI anymore, right?
So it's like, yeah, is it going to hurt your investigation significantly when you already released a portion of the video uh from a criminal investigative standpoint?
But then I would also wonder what if there's like this is the five percent time where there's something unique to the case we don't know that could compromise their investigation.
Like, what if there is a potential link between let's put it this way?
And it's just hyper speculation to make an example.
So Matt Walsh's theory is that they scripted this conversation immediately afterwards to create reasonable doubt in the event the boyfriend's ever charged with something as an accomplice.
The boyfriend can that they then go to trial and say, look at this message.
It proves the boyfriend didn't know, or at bare minimum, presents reasonable doubt.
I don't know.
All we can say is it's really weird.
There have been some people who have said, trust me, I like there are these online accounts that track the far left, and they're like, these wacko transferry internet anime dudes literally talk like this because they've got some kind of like developmental weird social thing.
Uh, but and this is again just for the purpose of example, what if in the video it shows potential contact or some kind of connection between the boyfriend and accomplice and the shooter?
They're not releasing it because they don't want the public to get access to this information, which could benefit a trans cult that did this.
Like they don't want they're investigating this this Utah-based trans queer rifle group or whatever, as well as a bunch of Discord groups.
Cash and the Utah government may be thinking we don't want them to know we have this information.
They will use that to their advantage to try and escape or get away with it, or craft you know, some kind of alternate theories.
So the first thing that they told us was there is this big plot on Discord.
And then the the day after the CEO of Discord comes out and says, We've reviewed every single piece of communication that Tyler made on Discord, and there was never any plotting or planning of any type of violence.
Now, when you talk about conspiracy theory, so Blake Bednar is the man who also broke the story about him, like the crowd crouching down.
Blake is working with a group of independent journalists.
These are students at the university that have been just relentless at about going through and finding every piece of footage.
So in the original video, that 60-minute live stream, there's a part of the video where you can see this man filming on the railing that's directly across from Charlie, probably 45, 50 yards out, and he's filming with this high-end Sony camera.
So Blake was able to track this man down.
He got the footage from this man.
And yesterday, for the first time, we were able to see what actually happened in really clear, crispy 4K video unedited.
And in that video, you see it, and I showed it to Myron on the way here.
You see, and I send it to Tim News IRL uh on X, if you want to pull it up.
His Blake, Blake Bednar's.
You see a device, it something goes off under his shirt.
Now, this is the first conspiracy theory that I've actually entertained, the thought of Charlie's shirt?
Yeah, where his microphone is.
Something goes off, and you see this thing go up into his shirt.
It's like something was under his shirt and it goes up like this and it snaps.
And then at the same time, the necklace, he's wearing a steel necklace or a silver necklace.
The necklace snaps in the front and then blows off over his head.
What detonated?
What went off under that shirt?
What was that?
For the first time we actually see the cloud of like it's a cloud of dust or a cloud of smoke.
Well, there I don't know how do you explain what this like what would cause this dust.
Maybe it was just the way his body reacted and the mic kind of came up and something broke in the mic.
That when the when the necklace broke broke, it kind of broke that thing.
But something like shoots up, or it looks like it shoots up, it goes up into his shirt and then instantly snaps back down in slow motion.
And all the experts that were saying that he originally was wearing a bulletproof vest, they're going, you're watching something like they said that they're not experts when they said that.
Well, they were they're saying that he his body reacted before you actually seen the hole.
So his body recoiled, then all of a sudden it was like something hit the vest and the bullet shot up into the bottom.
The thing is that there's so many different because I with this situation.
First it was he had bullet uh uh, you know, bulletproof armor and it ricocheted up and hit him in the neck.
Then it was no his nipples are showing, there's no way he had body armor.
Then it's like, oh no, the device exploded, you know, under his shirt.
Other people said, well, the rifle is so powerful that you know it just blew the shirt up.
Like I've heard so many different theories, and it's like at this point, um I don't know what to believe.
You know, I'm obviously like looking at all the evidence, I'm just extremely skeptical of everything they've been telling us because it's like, you know, one thing comes out and then like, oh no, that's not true.
Like I just heard that the uh the rifle you were telling me that they had the picture of, yeah.
Yeah, so this is DOJ.gov ATF uh document that says it'll probably be easier to read if I just do this.
Yeah, it says the ATF and other law enforcement located an older model imported Mauser 30.6 caliber bolt action rifle wrapped in a towel in a wooded area near the campus.
It it's this this it's still fair to say this does not confirm it.
And I would wait for an official statement.
And uh and the reason why is this is the initial report they got, which also meant mentions cartridges expressing transgender and anti-fascist ideology.
It is fair to say that what was written on that could be better described.
Transgender and anti-fascist ideology is not incorrect, but is it possible that the initial report from the ATF when they found the rifle was the presumption of a 30-hot six they included in the report?
And then later they're like, oh, actually it was a 308.
It's probably mostly accurate, because the fact that they subpoenaed him so quickly after, there's definitely an internal affairs DOJ I'm just I'm just saying, is it possible when the ATF on and what when the law enforcement found it?
They have one, they have one of the most intensive academies when it comes to firearms and identifying firearms because when if you charge someone with uh 18 USC 922, right, which is found in possession of a firearm, one of the things you need to establish is something called interstate nexus.
And for you to establish interstate nexus, you need to have the firearm, do a test fire, and then establish that different parts of that gun come from different places, therefore affecting interstate commerce.
That's how the feds get the jurisdiction.
So everyone at the ATF, especially the agents, all have a ridiculous amount of knowledge for the guns because they have a very difficult test to graduate their academy.
I I I would I would lean towards I think there the feds are probably looking at this this suspected shooter being like, we know we got him, but we don't get how.
Like, how does this all come together and make sense?
These other narratives about palm guns, and I'm I'm gonna say it, the Israel stuff.
I'm like, just stop, just stop.
I'm with Nick Fuentes on this one.
Like literally within three hours, people were like, Israel did it.
And I'm like, guys, come on.
Uh I will also add this is really funny.
There's this video, uh, it's got six million views from Range Day Bro, which uh I'm gonna I I'm not gonna show he actually shows a bit of I'm not gonna play it.
I just gotta say to Range Day, bro.
I watched the video, and there's a point where he explains that Charlie Kirk was shot from behind, but then shows a video of the people in front of Charlie Kirk and says that's where the shooter may have been.
And I'm like, but that's in front of Charlie Kirk.
So how could it have come from behind and the front?
That being said, he points to this grainy image, which um I might be able to highlight without actually showing uh anything graphic.
Yeah, and I think that I like I think the best way to handle this is like as evidence comes in, you would be oh you had to keep an open mind, analyze the evidence, see how credible it is, link it with whatever other evidence you have.
And you know, there's just been so many different theories that have come out there.
The phone calls that I was getting of people like freaking out, crying.
I'm like, this is they killed Charlie Kirk, dude.
And it's weird to me that these conspiracy theories are I, you know, is it for views?
I don't know, but it's effectively absolving violent far leftists that have been threatening Charlie Kirk's life for a long time and who are the primary suspects in this.
A lot of the the conspiracy theorists, I try I really still believe that there are so many people that feel like they got taken by the government when it comes to the COVID narrative or or other things that have come to light in the past that the government's ad admitted to lying about.
They're like, Well, you're not gonna get me again.
So whatever the government says, they don't believe, and they will look for it.
And that's why they're looking, there's so many different narratives now.
They're looking for another narrative that the government doesn't that you know isn't what doesn't line up with the what the official narrative is because they don't want to feel like they got sh, you know, they got tricked by the government.
So Israel is our greatest ally, and they're really in a bad spot right now, right?
Okay, so they're really in a bad spot publicly and with both left and right.
Now there's a nine probably 50 to 75% of people are convinced that Israel was involved in this in some way, shape, or form.
If you're the FBI, 75%.
And you can if you if you're the FBI, you and your turning point USA, Turning Point USA had three cameras filming at 30 to 60 frames per second.
There's so many FX3s or FX30s with G Master lenses on them.
There's seven or three of cameras within seven feet of Charlie.
You can see two, at least one in the in the right edge of that corner right there.
There's one right to his left, and there's one directly behind him.
We also have turning point employees tampering with an active crime scene, which I I vouch for them.
I said, you know, as a videographer, I don't trust this FBI.
If I thought that I had video footage of of Charlie's assassin on one of my memory cards, and I'm thinking that the FBI is gonna get the only video footage of this evidence, I would have taken that memory card too.
And then Ian Carroll goes, Yeah, but you're the type of dude who would have uploaded it online immediately after.
And I go, that's the first thing I would have done is upload that.
So you're right.
I wouldn't have taken those cards and hid that footage.
Candace says she's seen the footage, but she's only seen the camera from behind him.
And um, because me and Ryan were talking about this too, because he was saying, like, look, if a bad narrative comes out, are the feds gonna come in and correct it?
Me, let me put my agent hat back on.
No, you're gonna you're not gonna correct it.
You're gonna be like, let them run with whatever they want.
I'm still running my case.
You're not gonna care if I'm the investigator.
But the problem is now you're getting to a point where people don't trust the government.
So you need to be transparent to some degree, especially at least to deal with some of these conspiracy theories, because they run wild when you don't present everything.
What you're describing is the, but there's two different, I mean, ends that you're talking about, right?
Like what the what the FBI is looking for is to have the the proper process, you know, ostensibly to have the proper process to find find the person guilty and then of course you know put him in jail.
What's good for the overall government is not what's good for the FBI in that process.
What's good for the overall government and for the American people are different because it's better for the for the overall government to release all the information as much as you can, so that way that might hopefully help to reinstill trust in the government.
Okay, they gave us all the information.
Maybe this time, maybe the the Trump administration is actually doing better, maybe it's getting better.
But for the FBI, it's much better for them to keep all of the information that they can as close to their chest as well.
As someone who's working with them several times, they have a very bad habit of classifying everything, not sharing information, um, not being transparent.
It's it's a very bad habit that they I'll tell you guys a funny story.
I was working a Hawala case, this is like 10 years ago, right?
On people on uh a group of people that might have been suspected of some terrorism, right?
And I gave them information on some flight records, right?
Because uh HSI has access to everyone coming in and out of the country to help them out.
I called them back because I didn't have access to uh like I was out in the field or some shit like that.
And I hit the back, I was like, hey, what was that info on the uh travel stuff that I gave you?
Oh, I can't disclose that it's classified.
I'm like, I gave you that.
What are you talking about?
It's classified.
But they they have a very bad habit of overclassifying things and not being transparent.
So, you know, and this is why people don't trust them anymore.
And this is why other law enforcement agencies hate working with them, uh, because they just had have this very bad habit of stealing information.
If they get it, they don't share information, they classify everything.
So I think at this point, with the huge amount of distrust what the public has with FBI, they need to come out and at least dispel these myths.
And I don't uh like, for example, releasing the full footage of the guy shooting the gun, then getting getting up and running across the roof, that's not gonna hurt your investigation, dude.
He says, as a director of the FBI, I'm committed to ensuring the investigation into Charlie Kirk's assassination is thorough and exhaustive, pursuing every lead to its conclusion.
The full weight of America's law enforcement agencies are actively following the evidence that has emerged, but our efforts extend beyond initial findings.
We are examining every facet of this assassination.
We are meticulously investigating theories and questions, including the location from where the shot was taken, the possibility of accomplices, the tax message confession and related conversations, discord chats, the angle of the shot and the bullet impact, how the weapon was transported, hand gestures observed as potential signals near Charlie at the time of the assassination, and visitors to the alleged tutor's residence in the hours and days leading up to September 10th.
Some details are known today while others are still being pursued.
To ensure every possibility is considered, our primary focus is to complete this investigation and deliver justice.
To protect the integrity of the investigation and subsequent prosecution, we cannot release every piece of information we have to the public right.
Right now, we will ensure every question is addressed at the appropriate moment.
Regarding specific details, such as questions about the plane that allegedly turned off its transponder and depart after departing from an airport near the assassination site.
We can share updates when answers are confirmed.
After interviews with the pilot and the consultation with the F FAA, we determined the transponder was not turned off.
Incomplete flight data in rural areas caused the apparent gap.
The entire FBI mourns the loss of Charlie Kirk.
We will not rest until justice is served.
And our investigation into this assassination will continue until every question is answered.
What I want to say about Cash and this especially.
He's trying to be transparent, but what I will say is there are two principal scenarios with Cash Battle and Dan Bongino.
And the reason why I lean towards they are telling the truth is either Cash and Dan are in on the conspiracy, whatever it may be, or they're telling us the truth.
I do not believe that Cash and Dan Bongino, who are really good friends with Charlie, would have allowed him to be murdered for sure and would be in on anything like that.
The the only argument to that is the theory that Charlie Kirk escaped through a trapdoor and the whole thing was fake and Cash and Dan and Charlie are I there's no way, dude.
Okay, well, what about you didn't make so many leaps?
Doesn't Cash Patel, isn't it FBI policy that him and Bon Gino both, because they're emotionally neither of them would have had their positions that they would have got appointed by the Trump administration if it wasn't for the work that Charlie Kirk and his organization did, isn't it policy that they would recuse themselves from this investigation and then take it a step further and you go, okay, well, keep in mind, they're not the let's just trust that one.
Let me let me you can break that down.
But what I want to make this last point is that okay, so if they can't release this video that shows Tyler in the prone position taking this shot, and this does become something bigger, you now have George then with his the Patsy, then that would make Tyler and them on the roof, that guy not be the shooter, and then you start to look at all the moving parts and you go, well, who would be capable of carrying that out?
And then you have just now a release that there was no autopsy done that the coroner, that the doctor just signed off the death certificate, there was no autopsy actually done, and they did find the bullet or they didn't find the bullet, and according to the turning point spokesperson, he got information from a doctor, which violate every HIPAA law and released information without a written statement.
That's like I don't know, like there's like the first thing that I heard, there's there is so much speculative movie-based stuff, like the HIPAA thing.
The the first thing I heard from everybody was that was a professional shot.
And I'm like, why did you make that up?
Like, I'm not saying an individual.
We had we had a guest on and they were like, that was a professional shot.
And I was like, who told you that?
Because that is not true.
I uh Phil knows this better than I do.
I go to the range, I watched a 12-year-old with a bolt action make every shot from a hundred yards, a 12-year-old.
Because his dad was like, I'm gonna zero is is he got him a new rifle?
We're out in West Virginia.
This is common stuff.
And I am far from an expert.
But iron sights with my 480 with slugs, I don't miss it 50 yards.
Rifles are way easier to shoot than um than handguns.
But you know, um I do think uh, you know, releasing that footage wouldn't hurt.
But yeah, there's been yeah, the autopsy thing you were mentioning, and then like I think the New York Post reported a couple days ago that this the surgeon said, Oh, he blocked you know, he has really his bones blocked the bullet.
But look, but look, so there so a statement was made.
Uh Andrew Colvitt came out and he wrote this big long thing saying, I talked to I talked to the doctor.
The family has agreed that I can release this information.
So this wouldn't in no way violate HIPAA.
If a doctor was talking to Erica and she said, 'I want you, I want Colvet to hear this, and I want him to tell the world, that's not a violation of HIPAA.' I thought it had to be a written document signed according to their law.
I'm I'm I the other thing I want to I want to mention too in this regard, with like you mentioned cash being too close to this case.
People need to understand that we don't live in a locked rigid world of laws.
The only laws that actually bind us are the physical laws, and laws are are ignored all the time.
It's not it's not about what the law says, it's about what people are willing to do.
And if we're talking and and and so I'll just say this fair point, if the law says you can't, certainly never stop the bank robber.
So if people are like, but he wouldn't be allowed to share that because if HIPAA, I'm like, unless they just said they did not care and did it anyway, because who's gonna go after him?
Let me let me explain this real quick, uh, because this is important.
So as a director of the FBI, right, you're so high up, like he's not running the case.
Yeah, there's gonna be an FBI special agent, a GS-13 that's probably gonna be run this investigation with a squad where there's an SSA or supervisory special agent over him, then an ASAC and everything else like that.
So on the ground, when it comes to interviewing subjects, collecting evidence, et cetera, cash isn't doing that.
There's there's a group that's doing that in Utah, probably out of that field office.
Now, obviously, they're reporting what they're finding up the chain to him, but as far as like making uh decisions on the investigation, that's on the case agent.
So about the uh the the bullet and the accent wound stuff, there are a bunch of these videos from gun guys who uh have like they've done ballistics tests, they've gone viral.
And what I don't understand about this is that well, I don't want to impugn anyone's honor, so I won't say anyone specifically, but it took me just a couple of seconds to make a few phone calls from ballistic experts, gun guys, and then backing it up with general research to find that a 30.
Does stop in the body that the the the argument that people are making that it would have blown his neck out and there would have been a massive exit wound is uh we we I uh my the general assessment from everything everyone I've talked to and read is probably but not always.
And so to the point you made about Colvet saying it was like a magic bullet, or not he didn't say it was magic bullet.
I said Charlie was so young and strong that his body stopped the bullet and he saved it other people.
And so when people are saying, Where's the exit wound?
I'm like, a bullet entering from a high angle at a downward angle struck Charlie's spine, stopping the bullet from exiting and knocking and and killing him instantly.
And Frank Turk said the same thing.
When they brought him to the vehicle, he was in the car and they were trying to stop the bleeding.
He knew that Charlie was already gone, that his lights went out in an instant.
Bullets do real weird stuff when they go, like once they go inside your body, they hit you, it's the they'll follow bones, they'll get deflected into all kinds of weird ways.
They they break apart weird.
They do weird shit when they, you know, when you get shot, like the bullet itself, they do weird, weird shit.
I mean, he was literally helped promote Cash's fight with Cash.
He brought him on his show.
And when I was trying to promote my documentary, it wasn't directly through Charlie.
I would have to go through another ad, like a company that was kind of working with Charlie and could get me on his podcast, but it was like 25 grand to get on there for a show.
So like that's that's a big financial investment.
He could bring you on a show, whether it was for free or whether it was to say thank you or whatever the reason was, there is a direct tie between the cash's nonprofit and Charlie Kirk helping pro promote it and fundraise for it.
So you have that, plus you have the emotional fact that he was involved by just getting confirmed.
I mean, he, you know, it was Charlie who put it put together the only cash.
Remember the only cash thing that was going around when trying to get cash confirmed.
So you have two direct conflict of interest where you're you would think that he would say of this according to Kyle Serafin, would say that, like, hey, listen, I'm I'm financially or emotionally involved.
Me and Ben Dan Bon Gino are both gonna personally recuse ourselves from this investigation.
We're not gonna look at it, we're not gonna touch it.
We fully trust our secretary, the the new agent in charge, the ASAC in charge, and we're gonna leave the investigation right there.
Well, he didn't policy for two hours, Cash two hours after this story broke, after Charlie was shot, Cash was dining at an upscale New York restaurant.
And then for 12 hours, Cash did not even receive a photo of the suspect for 12 hours after the investigation.
How are you the FBI director?
Please explain this to me.
Your buddy, your buddy, your best friend, Cash Charlie Kirk takes a bullet to the neck, then you go out and get a steak dinner, and then 12 hours later, you still haven't seen a photo of the suspect.
And and chartering a private jet isn't something you can do instantly.
You've got to call in a ground crew.
Ground crew has FAA restrictions on when they can fly.
This is why when Kanye West came on this show and had a private jet waiting for him, we called shenanigans because you can't get ground crew, they're under under restrictions.
It's some that I I forget what it was, but he he storms out of the show, goes right to the to the local regional airport, and there's a jet waiting for him with a crew active.
And I said, I we called our our our charter company, and they said that's not possible that he called and got a private jet on the spot like that.
Because there's FAA restrictions on how how long someone has to be awake for and how long they've been awake, they can't fly or something like this.
So I'm just saying there's a million and one, there's an infinite possibility of reasons why Cash did not immediately run onto a plane and flat there, possibly chartering issues.
Maybe the plane wasn't even in New York at the time, whatever it might might be.
I don't think any of that is indicative of of potential wrongdoing.
Uh we could like real real quick.
We can certainly say Cash should have followed policy.
He should have recused himself.
I'm also gonna Be like the things I think Cash and Dan would have done would have probably put them in prison if they were there on the spot.
It's like I'm watching the show Peacemaker, and I know this is just fiction, but it's Rick Flagg just mercilessly beats Peacemaker for killing his son, the things a person would do.
So getting on a plane flying there in violation of policy is like the lightest things that you you'd probably imagine.
Um what I'll say just because I had as a director, you're really high up and you're the face of the agency.
He's not there making on-ground decisions when it comes to the actual investigation.
So I think he's far enough removed.
Now, if they wanted to play it safe, right?
They could have had maybe the other uh dire uh um because aren't there two uh deputy directors?
They just hired another guy, right?
He could have been the one giving the announcements and everything else like that.
But I do think it's important for people to understand that like it goes special agent, then it goes SSA, then it goes ASAC, this is special agent in charge, then it goes to SAIC, special agent in charge, then you go into like directors, then you go all the way up and continue to work your way up.
So he's very high up where he's basically just reporting, but he's not making on-scene decisions from the case perspective.
So, you know, that's what they would probably argue with because you said, hey, his defense might say, Hey, well, aren't you a buddy of this guy?
I'm like, I don't I don't think that's a guy that Israel would be upset with.
Um, I don't appreciate the weird weapon stuff.
And I'm not I'm not saying it to be disrespectful to people who want to pursue that.
Like you can, you I'm not your boss, you can do whatever you want.
But I do think there is a possibility of conspiracy beyond the official story we're getting.
I think Cash has made that point.
He doesn't know when he's investigating.
And as to the point about Yuri's Bezbinov, I think it's important to consider that the asset the motive for the assassination of Charlie Kirk, excuse me, may not be that this guy is just some fringe lefty wacker who hated Charlie Kirk.
It may actually be that these leftists were like, how do we foment conflict and crisis in this country?
And the real plan between this trend armed group is more sophisticated than we want to admit.
Yeah, I mean, like I said, for me, I want the autopsy and I want the full footage of us seeing this guy take the shot from a prone position like they're saying and running across.
I want to see that so that we can kind of build, you know, the timeline uh better.
And the fact that like we don't have this stuff, it's creating more questions than answers.
If you can't, if you can't release that footage and there is something bigger here, then obviously the first suspect would be Israel because they literally have an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to previous assassinations that they carried out.
They're one of the only militaries that has a special branch that's literally dedicated to specifically carrying out assassinations.
So I think that's why everybody's first instinct was going to Israel.
I think it's silly to argue simultaneously that he had a secret meeting with Bill Ackman and the Hamptons to convince Gen Z to support Israel, and then Israel killed him.
So, so the argument right now for on Israel is Israel is losing support at a tremendous rate among the young generation.
Charlie Kirk is holding interventions.
Like you said, you saw the video where he sat down with these Gen Z guys and he's like, Don't don't be mad at Israel, and then Netanyahu was like, how can we get rid of this guy who's our greatest advocate for Gen Z?
That makes no sense.
Then the what honestly makes more sense.
We got one super chat.
Uh let me let me see if I can find this one.
Uh here we go from Aramov, he says Turkey took out Charlie because he spoke against Islam.
If we're talking about I I don't think either of those are true, but I get the point being made.
People are like, Israel killed their greatest advocate among Gen Z. Why would they do that?
Well, I think that he was, I think that you you put all this money into this man and you have an investment, and then you're like looking at the last two weeks, maybe three weeks of his life, and you're going, oh, if this man is turning, if he is going to stand up and speak out against what happened in Gaza, I mean he was on the Patrick Depp Bavit show saying, like, listen, when I I was in Israel and it took me 45 minutes to get into a chopper and fly across the country.
So you're you're mean to tell me that for six hours that Israel didn't respond to the attacks on October 7th, and he's going, How is that possible?
He goes, It's not possible.
I want to know, was there a stand down order?
So he was really starting to dive in.
The Epstein list too.
He's one of the biggest advocates for release the entire Epstein list.
I just uh I I think the people who are trying to justify Israel as the culprit are people who I mean, look, Ian Carroll was like, I can't believe we figured out it was Israel right away.
And it's like that day.
He said it's within 24 hours, everyone figured out who the likely suspect was.
He said he was their greatest advocate and they killed him.
Then you start getting all of this narrative stuff where it's like, did you know that Charlie Kirk was uh who he was questioning Israel?
I saw a video where Charlie asked Ben Shapiro about he Charlie says to Ben, what would you say to someone who describes what's going on in Gaza as a genocide?
And then it slowly zooms in on Ben's face and doesn't edit, so Ben goes like and it's like trying to imply that Charlie had turned on Israel, so they killed him.
It is insane.
Now let me just start by saying, is it in the realm of possibility that Massad was like we got to take out Charlie Kirk?
And so I'm like, there's there's a there's an infinite number of possible suspects and why and and who would be upset with Charlie Kirk.
You can you can argue the Qataris did it.
Charlie Kirk was the last bastion for defending Israel among the younger generation.
So Cutter had it out for Israel, and then they took out Charlie.
And that's why Israel bombed cutter.
I can I can I can connect the dots in a million and one ways.
This doesn't serve our understanding of what happened to just jump beyond why was the gun there?
Was it actually the gun that was used?
What's with that weird photo?
Why, why was the message looking all weird?
All of those questions are legitimate.
And we start from there and we move forward and try and figure out what's going on.
The people that are coming out and screaming Israel are making it harder for us to actually break this down and figure out what really happened.
This is what I can't stand about the all like the hardcore conspiracy theory stuff.
The feds Historically would put out fake theories to distract people and and throw them off the trail.
A really great example, I think is Pizzagate, where you get this email that says, is it I forgot I'll I'll paraphrase, but it was like, is it more fun?
Uh uh what is it is is it more fun playing dominoes on pizza or on pasta?
And then for no reason on 4 chances, someone posted this thing claiming that it meant boys and girls.
And I said, that's not correct.
CP does mean child porn, but pizza and pasta, that connection doesn't exist anywhere.
It was just made up at some point.
I argued, guys, the feds are throwing you off the trail of what's actually going on with these emails that got leaked, which are likely indicative, in my opinion, of doing drugs at high profile parties, playing dominoes on pizza and pasta.
There's even code words for crack and meth or something like this.
What happens?
A guy shows up to a pizza place, shoots into the concrete floor, gets arrested, and they say you're all a bunch of crackpot weirdos for believing this.
Despite the fact we eventually learned the Epstein stuff is true.
Their goal is to throw you off the trail with nonsense.
What we want to do is we want to we want to look at everything that's been laid out.
I think you made a really great point, Ryan, about how the FBI never confirmed 30.
Someone else pointed out in the chat that gives it a bit more credibility.
This is important.
Someone point out in the chat that when that ATF document was leaked, the ballistics had not returned yet on whether or not it really was a 30 out six rifle.
It was just the expert opinion of of the ATF guys who saw it.
Because I've been at the scene of stuff like this where uh a case is, you know, breaking, it's huge, it's hitting the news.
Um, new information's coming in, you know, facts are changing constantly as you're doing interviews, you're, you know, you're collecting evidence, things change constantly.
So yeah, it could have been like, hey, this is it looked like it was a Microsoft Teams chat or something like that, where they're just in a group chat answering questions, uh talking to each other, whatever.
So, you know, they say the fog of war, well, the fog of investigation is very real too, and especially in the beginning.
And so they told me only use uh 762 in the M1A because the higher pressure could be could damage the gun or break it because M1A is an older technology or something to that effect.
So that seems reasonable as well.
I I'll just put it like this.
We are not being told the truth is a fair is a fair assessment, I think a reasonable assessment.
I I I I I I want to keep the conversation on Charlie, but the the bigger picture now moves into uh with this story, you see anti-ICE penned, inked onto these bullets.
It looks like there may be potentially some writing right here that you can't see.
I'm not sure, but they haven't released any of that, so I'm I'm gonna go.
It looks like there might be writing here and here, maybe not.
You just see the anti-ICE.
Is it a stripper clip?
Those that don't know, it's a thin piece of metal you can slide the bullets into.
The left's assessment on the Charlie Kirk assassination anti-ICE is that the feds are staging these things.
That I mean, what it what did um Aaron Rubar say?
Three rice tag fires in three weeks?
What the accusation the the left can so while the right is arguing palm guns, guy in the bushes, dude, you know, trapdoor or whatever, Israel.
Um, I've heard some pretty wild conspiracy theories.
These are utility maintenance access doors commonly used in sidewalks and buildings to provide workers' access to electrical and plumbing and infrastructure.
I've tried my best to just disprove as many of these conspiracy theories as I could possibly disprove, and and I've just been going through them all one by one.
A man so famous for his misinformation, his to RuPar means to pull things out of context to trick people into believing the wrong thing.
I'm not kidding.
Let me let me pull this up.
Rupar, Urban Dictionary.
And everybody always posts it at him.
To lie with impunity.
Uh here we go.
To RuPar is to lie with impunity, a brazen statement with a focus on misleading, usually with the intention of a predetermined outcome, to purposely mislead to intentionally and grossly mischaracterize a statement and/or video.
The left's conspiracy theory on this one is that Trump and the feds have been faking these.
First of all, they thought they they they think or they claim the assassination on Trump was staged.
And then you got politics girl, who I believe is a Midas touch podcast, it could be wrong, saying that he came from a conservative background and the engravings on the bullets were just manufacturer markings.
Then you get Jimmy Kimmel coming out.
They are trying to do everything they can to cover it up.
The left is now arguing that Charlie Kirk was killed by by Trump.
Like not even I I kid you not.
There is someone that I will leave unnamed who was prominent in Hollywood who posted a video to their Instagram of a woman saying in 1934, blah, blah, blah, Reichstag fire, Hitler did this so that he could gain power.
And you know why they're posting that.
The implication being that Trump had Charlie Kirk killed.
They posted a meme.
The left has been sharing a meme where it's a guy crying and pointing it under the camera, and it's titled Donald Trump shooting Charlie Kirk when he realizes he needs to cover up Epstein.
This is what the liberals are saying.
So on the right, the conspiracy theories we have are Charlie was killed by some shady behind the scenes group.
Who actually did it?
What are they covering up?
Was it Israel?
On the left, they're saying Trump killed Charlie Kirk.
But uh, so I don't want I don't want to falsely accuse the governor of posting that himself.
My point is just that liberals are sharing this because in their minds he faked the whole thing.
But there is another image that I want to share with you about the left conspiracy over the killing of Charlie Kirk.
I posted this because it was on the front page of Reddit.
And uh here you go.
This is what is on the front page of Reddit.
Actually, let me open this and make it make it bigger.
It says horse horse vessel, and this was uh viral.
I think I included 32,000 uh upvotes, six diamonds, seven thousand five hundred and twenty-nine comment uh comments.
And it says uh Nazi SA officer Horst Vessel was shot in his Berlin apartment by a local communist.
He would die of sepsis on February 23rd.
The incident would have been just another example of sectarian violence in Weimar Germany, had it not been for the intervention of Nazi uh Nazi prompandist Joseph Goebbels.
Go uh Goebbels, is how you pronounce it?
Used his media connections and know-how to turn the man into a martyr for the Nazi Party.
He extolled vessel in Nazi newspapers and even gave the a eulogy at his funeral.
They posted this because they're now trying to, this is where they're advancing their argument that Charlie Kirk was a Nazi, murdered, and Trump is now holding Nazi rallies.
They claimed the memorial form was a Nazi rally, and what they are trying to tell liberals now is that everything Trump does, no matter what it is, is in support of the Nazi uh of expansion of Nazism to the point where RuPar called it a Reichstag fire, but one of them every week.
So uh here we go into the bigger picture of the conspiracies, what's happening to this country?
Yahoo News.
Uh this is this morning.
275 plainclothes agents in January 6th crowds from a uh uh congressional source.
So uh who said the FBI told him this.
And I think we're only now getting these details because, well, the Republicans have one and you've got Cash Patel in the FBI, and now he has he's digging through this, putting it out there.
Where why are you implying that she's because she made a video where she said she heard bang on her, or she hid in the bathroom because she thought the writers were there?
How did she know the writers were gonna be in the building?
Uh so I then listened to her story, checked, checked the timeline, and this is February 5th or 6th of 2021.
And I said, AOC made the story up.
The time in which she detailed the uh she ordered lunch, it was banging on her door, she hid in the bathroom.
That's not possible because the breach of the Capitol didn't happen for another hour.
The at the time she's describing where the cops came and banged on her door, was the exact moment the outer perimeter fence got knocked over.
Meaning the first point at which a Trump supporter actually stepped on the grass, which is if you know the Capitol complex is very, very large.
They were very far away from the building.
This means that while AOC was in her build in her inner office, the riders had not actually even touched the grass of the Capitol Complex.
Around the time they discovered the bomb at the RNC and the DNC, is around the same time they knocked the fencing down.
The famous video where you see uh was it Ray Epps whisper to the guy and then they push the barricades down and start walking up the the concrete towards the building?
I mean, she couldn't have known that there was any real threat.
Why would she be scared at all of literally anything?
She didn't know the bombs were planted.
She didn't know the cops were coming to evacuate her, and she didn't know there was going to be a riot at the Capitol that would have stormed in and broke anything.
That didn't happen until an hour later.
So why would she go and hide in her bathroom?
Honest question.
Unless she had foreknowledge that there was going to be a storming of the Capitol.
So when she heard the bang on her door, she went, Oh shit.
It's happening.
And went and hid in her bathroom.
Now she could have fabricated the whole thing and never actually hid in her bathroom.
The bang on her door was the Capitol Police Officer evacuating because at 1247, I believe, they found a pipe bomb at the RNC and shortly after they found a pipe bomb at the DNC.
The Capitol police then went to evacuate members of Congress.
This is an hour and s or so before they breached the Capitol building.
So why when the cop is banging on her door, did she say, the rioters are here to kill me and go and hire hide in her bathroom?
AOC is either completely fabricated the story, or she had foreknowledge of the rides of the Capitol.
Considering now we're learning that there are 275 plane clubs, plus I believe another couple doesn't undercover outright and informants.
I'm done playing games with these people.
They are they are right now.
Aaron Rupar is not a far leftist.
He is a mainstream liberal Democrat media personality calling Charlie Kirk's assassination, the attack on ABC, and the ICE attack Reichstag fires, saying Trump is doing these attacks.
I'm done giving them the benefit of the doubt.
No, if AOC wants to publicly assert she hid in her bathroom from rioters, but it was an hour before the riot happened, then I'm gonna go and say AOC was informed beforehand J6 was gonna happen.
I agree with what Nick Fuente said when he talked about there is a black gentleman after Charlie Kirk assassinated, went to that university and was like mocking them and he was live streaming it.
And Nick made a very good point.
He's like, these people don't believe in anything that we believe in.
They don't believe in our rule of law, they don't believe in our policy.
You can't debate, you can't argue with these people.
These people need to be completely removed from our society.
And I go, I think you're right.
At this point, like you can't tolerate the left.
They're not trying to have an open debate and have open co you know, if they disagree with you, they want to kill you.
Yep and that that is not how our country was built.
So I can only hope, as I've made I made this point.
There are uh on the right, everybody's saying we have to do everything legally.
We have an election, we have Trump, we have law enforcement, law enforcement needs to take care of this.
The left is saying the opposite.
The left is saying you're next.
Keith Olbermann said you're next mother effer to uh to Scott Jennings.
Quickly panic, took it down.
The the the issue that we have, there was a someone made the super chat.
Actually, I wanna I want to read the super chat.
Um let's see.
Uh I think actually it may have been may have been nuked.
Yep, YouTube nuked it.
Okay, so I'm sorry, I can't I can't uh shout you out, but they said it doesn't matter.
Actually, was that right there?
No, someone said uh the theories don't matter.
The left took credit for it right after it happened.
And and I think the point that I've made with all of these stories is that I I I call it I say the truth doesn't matter.
The I and I give the left the opportunity to clip that out of context.
They always do because you like you can't debate them.
The point I'm making is if you go to a liberal and tell them this guy who shot Charlie Kirk, the evidence points to a liberal individual, they're gonna say, nope, he was right wing.
The Ugov data shows us that two to one liberals believe that the Charlie Kirk assassin had was a was a Trump supporter.
Jimmy Kimmel put that out on his show.
They don't they won't believe you.
They don't believe what you believe.
They live in a completely different set of world of facts.
So it doesn't matter when we're dealing with this escalation of violence in this in this conflict that's happening in this country.
It doesn't matter, even if you can prove it's true, because they're not listening.
I mean, I've been saying for five years that Antifa and BLM need to be terrorist organizations, you know.
Obviously, it took the tragic death uh of Charlie uh for them to finally say, Oh, maybe we need to keep reel in this, you know, leftist uh, you know, violence, because here's the thing.
If you're a right-wing advocate group of some kind, if you gather or you have an organization, you could be rest assured there's gonna be an open federal investigation on you.
They're gonna try to get informants in there, undercovers, etc.
These leftist organizations don't deal with the same scrutiny from law enforcement at all.
That's why they can burn down, you know, Minneapolis with almost no consequence.
Meanwhile, everyone at J6 gets arrested um regardless of where they were.
I I honestly won't rule it out because these people are like the thing, also like I and I noticed this too.
You're a fascist, you're a Nazi, you're a bigot, blah, blah, blah.
It's like they dehumanize you, right?
So that they can go ahead and like justify their violence against you.
Like that's that's what they do.
I can't like the amount of people I saw celebrating after he got killed, like I was like, what is going on here?
Like, dude, if some if something happened to a prominent left-wing podcaster, I would be like, we need to find the people I uh you know involved in this.
Like, I'm not gonna celebrate someone's death.
But very few people on the left show showed compassion.
unidentified
And then people said, Oh, well, all the politicians came out and said that political violence is unacceptable.
When I when I look at all the conspiracy theories around the Charlie Kirk stuff, let me ask you guys this.
There was an infrastructure in place that Trump has dismantled through USAID.
I'm not saying literally everything USAID uh did was bad, but it did send money to various NGOs, which then cycle that money to various groups and it it's back into politicians as well.
But I, but you know, and and that's a key point, which is important.
But I think a lot of this NGO money that also uh Lee Zeldon found through these environmental groups, finds its way to direct action nonprofits that engage in violence.
Someone is at these, at these they come direct action meetings.
There are leaders.
They say Antifa's leaderless.
That is a lie.
They just don't know the name.
And this is intentional because the activists will say at these meetings, and I've been to them, I have seen them say it.
If the government finds out who's organizing and in charge, they will character assassinate or imprison you.
So they intentionally try to hide who's actually running the show.
But how do people know where to stand?
Who makes the flyers?
Who has the path for what the protest is going to look like?
Someone is organizing this.
I think through um USAID, through these environmental NGOs, money circulates to these groups.
There's also the question of George Soros.
Trump has now ordered these things to be dismantled.
The conspiracy theory that I think uh the question I have for you guys is this apparatus which is being destroyed.
Could it be possible that the actual nefarious group behind it is this left-aligned group?
And the reason why we're having trouble breaking down exactly what happened and we're getting conflicting information is not that cash is doing anything wrong.
He's genuinely trying to figure this out, but it was a premeditated move by a highly organized, well-funded group that is the remnants of what was being dismantled by Trump's actions.
And the the that that is the actual player here who killed Charlie Kirk.
Well, have we seen any single person arrested for any of these NGOs, any of this money laundering, anything that Doge has found, have we single seen a single person arrested?
And has anybody actually gone through and back?
Because I've been down to Mexico, I've got smuggled across the Guatemalan border into Guatemala by the cartels on water rafts to specifically go document OMI, one of the main NGOs who was playing a major role in smuggling all of the women and children out of Guatemala into Mexico, went down there.
These organizations are still operating, they're still running with full staff, and they're still operating on at full send.
So there none of them that I've seen have been defunded.
So if the money's not coming from USAID anymore, what we're being told is that it's actually coming from other government organizations.
And so with Trump cutting off a lot of the funding to these various NGOs, uh it's not gonna stop.
Like there's a couple years of operation left, and these groups may try and find outside funding through other means to maintain operations.
When I was at Occupy Wall Street, Fox News was claiming the protesters were paid to be there by George Soros.
And that is one of the stupidest ways to describe it and made it so easy to just to to to ignore.
On the ground at Occupy, the joke among the activists was where's my Soros check?
The one thing that no one really understood what was really happening is that they were NGOs that operated out of New York that had received funding from Open Society Foundation and other other groups.
Employees on salary for those nonprofits were were given the green light by their bosses to go and help occupy organize.
Um I'm happy that he designated Antifa as a terrorist organization because what's going to happen now is whenever you put the T-word into an investigation, you get an enormous amount of funding.
Now, Joint Terrorism Task Force offices all across the country can target these guys.
They can really start to look at the money, they can start going through fencing, they can look at SARS, and they can really attack it from the financial angle.
And the reason why this is good is because these JTTFs have an FBI guy, they have an HSI guy, they have an IRS guy, they got DEA guys, ATF guys.
And they can now actually target these organizations appropriately and go after the money uh since it's under a terrorism initiative.
And this is what I've been saying for a very long time.
And that's why they've been able to kind of evade law enforcement, do all this BS for a while because they weren't properly targeted.
This is exactly why he made Trend Araguis or whatever, a terrorist organization.
Because when you make them a terrorist organization, now you can utilize all types of different resources to include intelligence services, uh you know, that collect information, maybe not in a legal way or whatever, but now you can use all these resources to go after them.
Well, so he domestic terrorists is not a legal distinction.
And I think the reason you you know Steve Steven Miller knows this, and I think the reason they haven't labeled Antifa a foreign terrorist organization, which grants them all of those powers you described, yeah, is take a look at the indictment of Comey.
Trump Trump had an attorney who wouldn't prosecute Comey.
If Trump got in and on day one said, I want you to go and bring a case against all of these people, the agents and the attorneys would be like, I'm not doing it.
This is crazy.
They're gonna be like, the emperor has no clothes.
I mean, if we do this, if you if you arrest Comey, I mean, this is gonna be nuts.
Trump waits a little while, you build up the culture.
Trump puts out a post saying, Pam, go arrest these people.
I think the reason Trump said anti-far domestic terrorists is so that we are not going to see spying and mass surveillance or anything like this.
However, the debate happens in the media.
The right and the left are going to debate the merits of Antifa being terrorists, and you're gonna create a 50-50 issue where the liberals say no, and the right says yes.
Then once this is normalized in the culture, Trump says FTO designation.
Why?
Netherlands is proposing it, Poland is proposing it.
We just saw Antifa in France and Italy, and Trump's gonna, he's gonna say, we have evidence of financial ties between these groups.
This is a foreign international, this is an you know terrorist organization.
Howard Rubin, an ex-New York financier with ties to Soros, was arrested for sex trafficking women uh to a sex dungeon penthouse, according to the feds.
Well, then that's why I hate indictments, because indictments don't go into detail like to the same level as a criminal complaint does, but um, but they're gonna talk about some of the stuff here.
Well, what I'm saying is it it is incredibly silly to be committing a serious felony federal crime and then ask them to sign an NDA that they won't reveal the crime being committed.
And a lot of the women are probably aren't educated enough to know they probably think they signed some type of NDA that's ironclad, and if they speak out or say anything that they're gonna get cooked.
Because that's what they got Diddy for because it's gonna sound funny because I actually watched a few days of the trial.
Um, really what they're banging, uh, you know, he's getting in trouble for is flying in these male prostitutes to have sex with Cassie.
That's what jammed them up because they affect the interstate commerce because they were traveling interstate to engage in a sex act and they were getting paid.
You're right that so this looks very similar to the Diddy case here.
On various occasions, victims notified Ruben and Powers that Ruben had caused lasting pain and physical injuries, including for example, a women's breast implant had flipped upside down and required surgery to fix.
I think we have a major false flag coming from X. I agree.
Something so massive that like we, I think it either takes down the internet or because it has they have to do something when where they take out the internet because we are breaking these things down so fast.
So whatever they do has to create so much chaos and so much damage that it really brings us to our knees as a country.
Remember, we were warned about the cyber 9-11 that this this cyber attack would hit and uh m many people may not know this, but there's there was there was something that happened in like the early 2010s, I think it was called DNS cash poisoning.
It was such a very serious flaw in dom in DNS, I think it's domain name services, that it would have destroyed the entirety of the internet.
And uh there was this dude, um, it's been a while.
Dan Kaminsky.
I I I I I he was a he's a friend, but it's just been so long.
Not like a good friend of mine or anything.
Dan Kaminsky, yeah, he died.
Uh he convened the great powers of the internet in secret, revealing this exploit that was called DNS cash poisoning.
He said, if this exploit gets out, the entire of the internet can be shut down.
And so all of these companies worked in secret to plug the gap and deal with the exploit after it was fixed.
They announced that this thing had happened.
And it was like this was an apocalyptic level.
So much of our economy is based on the internet.
I agree with you that uh, and I I can tell you that I would I'll put it like this.
I have sources that have warned me of a potential for a very serious incident.
I did not go to Charlie Kirk's memorial because my we had a security team assessment, and the threats that I've been receiving uh are credible.
And the basic plan that was laid out as to how me and my my wife and I would be able to go was nuts.
And I described it as basically like two agents on the plane, two security guards on the plane sitting next to us, uh, met by two more once the plane, like so.
We have four people drive us, you know, to the airport, two accompany us onto the plane.
That's why when Keith Oberman said your next mother effort of Jennings, we know he was threatening death.
And he immediately took it down and said, No, no, I meant career.
BS.
So the security assessment that we received, it was like 24 hour 24-7 lockdown in the hotel with guards outside the front.
And I'm like, I'm not, I'm not doing that.
We immediately following the assassination of Kirk, the general assessment was we need to wait to see where we end up in the next week or two so we can better assess the threat level.
And right now, it could not be higher.
It is maxed out.
Law enforcement sources that we have are warning of a major incident they fear is likely.
This is internal security assessment for me and my team.
And I can't go into gray.
I I can't, I'm not gonna go beyond that, but I'm just gonna say this.
I don't the reason why I don't like to say this stuff is because people always say, Tim, you're blackpilled, you're pessimist, you're fanning the flames, it's rage bait.
Um, but in the context of this conversation, let me just say it.
You don't even need me to tell you this.
You don't even need Ryan's sources or the rumors he's hearing.
Take a look at how the left celebrated the assassination of Kirk, a terror attack a week later, a terror attack a week later.
Last night on IRL, 26 off the top of my head would compiled a list of all the terror attacks that we've seen throughout this year, and they're escalating.
Law enforcement source warns they fear a major attack is is almost guaranteed.
I'm I mean, I'm I gotta be careful say this stuff.
I am not there, there's a reason why this is not being put out in news stories because private behind the scenes, when they say, like, hey, look, we we genuinely believe the likelihood of this is it's one.
It it will happen.
And we don't know where or how, and we're trying to stop this.
The reason I'm told people believe this is one, Charlie Kirk was just killed.
Immediately following this, death threats rang out.
The fear is that it is not a stopping point, is a green light.
And we saw this with another terror attack at ABC, more threats sent at ABC, more school shootings.
More uh a school shooting the same day as Charlie Kirk, and and then the attack on ice.
The general assessment, and I gotta be honest, I don't even know if this is like a real, like we looked at the intel kind of stuff.
I feel like any person reading the internet is gonna be like, oh crap, this is getting crazy.
Someone, someone made threats online and they thought the person was on the grounds, it resulted in a an accidental shooting.
There was a there were bomb threats at various universities.
Guys, what I what I said, we can we know the political affiliation of the shooter there or the person that made the There was no shooter, it was a guard who shot somebody on accident.
The the the blue the exit would have been so massive, but then I, you know, I read one report where it was like a combat, you know, ballistics guy who like pulled a bunch of actual peer-reviewed journals breaking down injuries and how these things happen.
Anyway, the what you will see, I uh the first thing I'll say is I asked Eric Prince on this show.
Do you think, based on all of your experience in the in foreign countries and with the people you've worked with, we are headed towards something like these collapse, collapse of these nations or civil war, revolution, whatever you want to call it.
And he said, the one thing I'll say is it it's overnight.
One day, everything seems normal, and then you wake up and the water's off, and there's no internet anymore.
That's what he said.
No internet.
And so the way I described it based on what I've experienced, and I've not been in war zones, but I've been in conflict crisis, revolution, civil war, is everything outside of the conflict zones feels normal.
And so the the story I give is when I was in Egypt during the second revolution, there's a guy at McDonald's, three blocks away from Tahrir Square.
And there's thousands of people in Tyreer, APCs and black hawks coming in.
They announce they're going to be like it was the bridges were being shut down.
We decided to get out before it got too late.
People were watching soccer matches at McDonald's eating cheeseburgers.
We went to Heliopolis and kids were playing with race cars.
I went to a fast food restaurant, got kebab.
The world goes on.
But what did it look like in that mall?
While I was ordering kebab on a stick, it was lamb and it was delicious.
The TVs are talking about the collapse of their government, the conflicts, the the the mass uh uh the mass protest organization occupation by by the Muslim Brotherhood in Nasrus Nasser City.
And then when we left and the government collapsed, the military went and started just shooting the Muslim Brotherhood, killing them and wiping them out.
What we are seeing now in this country, which is terrifying me, is what you would expect to see as you enter a civil war period is you turn the news on, and this is how I described it months ago.
And you're watching Brett Bear, and he goes, a bomb, IED was detonated on US Route 95 in or I'm sorry, on State Road 95 in Texas, shutting down trade and transport from the eastern regions to the West.
So, well, maybe you know, maybe not Brett Bear because he's not got someone, but the newscaster says, I guess uh Mary, people aren't gonna have that strawberry shortcake for this Christmas, so plan accordingly.
And other news, a dog won a uh ribbon at a at a at a grooming contest.
I wake up and I hear about the ice shooting, and we don't have any details and we don't know.
You wake up and you find out that the FBI had 275 plain clothes agents.
You wake up and you find out that James Comey is being indicted.
These things are happening with increasing uh uh they're they're exponential, it's accelerating rapidly, gradually, and then suddenly.
And so I don't know what's gonna happen.
I don't want to say we are at civil war.
People are saying it's a civil strife period.
I think that is fair to say this is bleeding Kansas.
And I think that, you know, if you're a foreign government and you're somebody who despises the United States, you really don't need to attack us.
You can just stand by.
I mean, our country's falling apart right now.
That's why I'm saying it's gonna be some type of false flag.
And the intel that we were getting was from a border patrol agent who spent 24 years in the in the agency, and he's got guys on the ground still.
And he's saying that they're warning of some type of false flag attack where they're gonna attack cities, specifically five or more at the same time that specifically only have one trauma center in that in that major city, and then they're gonna be actually already have undercover operatives at that uh at that trauma center.
So when everybody basically transcends on to take their people there, they're gonna be another carrying out another attack, and then that attack's gonna be used to drive us into a war or martial law or whatever the case may be.
It's from France 24, and it's just the first one I pulled up.
Never mind the war.
Syrian regime courts, holiday makers, and public relations push.
Idyllic beaches, pristine waters, and plush hotels dominate the Syrian regime's latest wave of promotional videos to reinstate the country's former role as one of the Middle East's top tourist spots.
There's just one detail missing Syria's civil war.
When I worked at Vice, one of the pitches that I had, and we almost did this, was I forgot the title we were gonna call it.
It was um we had found on Facebook that Syria was promoting nightlife partying in Damascus during the civil war.
And this is like the peak.
This is like just after the gas attack.
And I said, why don't we go and party in Syria?
And it will be a little bit silly vice-style documentary, but the point is to explain to people that even in the worst conflict zone right now in the world with these gas attacks.
Look at how people live.
They're hanging out on the beach, they're driving to the mall, they're partying at nightclubs.
I'm sure they'll let us film all of this because they want that message to get out.
But the real message we're conveying is what war really looks like.
We mix the nightlife partying tourism commercials with the actual war zone.
It was like 20 late 2013, 2014 when when Damascus, the Syrian Tourism Agency was running commercials.
And we were watching them laughing, being like, yo, there are bombs going off, highways being taken over, and the government's on the verge of collapse.
And look what they're trying to convince Americans to do.
They were telling Americans to come party in Damascus.
Yeah.
So anyway, my point is people think life is like a movie.
And that movie Civil War was so wrong about a lot of it.
They they like the country's basic like they I don't know the guy strung up at the gas station.
And if your power grid shuts down too imagine being in a high rise that's why I thought it would happen in the summer because you got to be thinking about how hot it would be if they just shut off power in a New York sky rise you know on the 10th 20th 30th floor all the everybody would be forced out.
Within a day your toilets would be smelling your house would smell like poop it would be just disgusting if everybody be forced in the streets and then it would be complete chaos right the Chicago River will reverse.
They they use pumps to change the flow of the river.
I could be wrong about this but I watched uh I watched something from Discovery a long time ago about what happens when the power goes out and it was like within three days the river reverses its flow or something like that.
Yeah yeah digital ideas to travel there come into his country now man they're cooked they're so cooked I mean if you go to Australia I've been to I've seen so many videos of cops arresting people for tweets I've been to 20 countries in the last 40 weeks give or take and I tell you what you get to some of these countries and you're just like wow it really kind of radicalizes you and looks at like what we think we have here as freedom from an American standpoint you go to some of these other countries you're like wow there's more freedom there's more opportunity I mean you go down to El Salvador right now and you want to feel what the American dream probably felt like in the 60s 50s 70s go down to El Salvador.
It's really, it'll radicalize you because every single member of their government, from the president all the way down to literally the secretary of state, they wake up every day with one mission.
And that mission is to make your life better.
They want to make the life better of the citizens who live there, every single member of the government.
And you go from what we have here in America to this infighting and the left first right.
And they're constantly trying to pit us against each other.
You go to El Salvador, the second you get off your phone, you don't need your phone.
You don't need to be constantly on social media because you just have so much to do.
There's so much opportunity.
And it's such a really good feeling.
So I highly recommend to anybody in this audience, if you get a chance, just visit El Salvador for a week and see what it's like there.
me ask you a question Myron because you did federal law enforcement Gavin Newsom just passed a law saying the feds have to take their masks off I these these feds that are operating in California for ice they live in California.
They're California residents.
Yeah uh so it depends so they're subject to both federal jurisdiction and state jurisdiction as it pertains to their job.
So it depends like if they're running a big immigration operation they're gonna probably fly agents in you got border patrol there you got FBI's helping out whatever um I mean they can't I don't really think they could do too much because the the agents are probably just going to keep their masks on anyway like then so so the the question I the question is will Gavin Newsom actually enforce the law that's gonna be tough.
That because then then you know our just do you think he would or would not?
If he doesn't, then the temperature stays cool a little bit.
But if Gavin Newsom actually steps forward to try and force federal agents to demask asserting authority over federal law enforcement like this, and do it.
The federal ICE officer is gonna be like, you are not taking this mask off of my face, and I'm doing my job under orders of the president of the United States.
You know, well, technically, the the supremacy clause, so the by the order of the law, the federal officers don't have to listen to the local officers.
And and also remember that like a lot of these guys, you know, local law enforcement has an incredible amount of discretion.
They actually have more discretion than feds do.
So I I it would be a nightmare to actually pull off because you know, every agency is gonna kind of run it the way that they want.
Now, the state police are gonna have less power because obviously they're the chain of command is they deal with Newsom directly, like their protection detail.
So, you know, I could see tra state troopers potentially doing it, but what if what if Newsom steps it up and says, I'm not gonna send state police to go and uh make these guys take their masks off?
I'm gonna use the California tax department and I'm gonna take your home from you.
And I'm gonna put you and your wife and your kid out on the streets because you broke the law.
If they if they decide to break California state law, which it is law right now by wearing a mask, Gavin Newsom has a plethora of enforcement options to go against these people.
The question is, will the ICE agents tell Trump I can't do this because the state is gonna come after me?
Or will Trump say, or or will they say, No, I work for the federal government, these are my instructions.
But I'm but listen, somebody who's got two kids and a wife and a house in California, they're not gonna sell their house and sell all their assets, pull their kids out of school and then move to Colorado or or DC or something.
This is the this was the problem we had in the f in the American Civil War.
These generals were trained at West Point and were friends with each other.
So when uh was it I can't remember if it was like uh Jackson or I think it might have been Jackson, um, my home or my country, I choose my home.
Yeah, I mean, here's the thing it's gonna create a nightmare because keep in mind that when they're doing these immigration raids, you got ATF agents there, you got FBI guys there, you got DEA, you got pretty much every federal law enforcement agencies out there.
So Gavin isn't gonna just launch this on ice.
This is gonna be on all the federal agencies.
So it's gonna be it's gonna create a lot of problems.
A lot.
So I don't know how he's gonna actually enforce it.
How is it possible that these people have amounted this much wealth and they treat us like we're their slaves?
They're not our public servants.
They stay in office forever.
How are how is nobody investigating them?
Is what I want to know.
I think that's what um the American people are the most upset with is it's that we have received zero accountability, and these people have literally made our likes a living hell.
You know, uh, we're we're we're we're close, we're gonna have time.
I know I talk a lot of guys, but I just want to say one more thing.
In the American, the American Revolution took 20 years.
When the founding fathers signed the declaration of independence, the war had already been on for a year.
The shot heard around the world happened at Lexington and Concord a year before the the declaration was signed.
When they signed the declaration of independence, they sent it off to the Crown for recognition, and it took three months for the King and Parliament to even review the Declaration of Independence.
It was an additional three or so months for a response to come back to the colonies.
That means the founding fathers were at war for a year.
The revolutionary period, the Boston Massacre and the Tea Party were years apart.
And they sit down, they say, okay, let's sign this thing.
They sign it.
Okay, let's send it out.
And then they went and farmed for for three months.
Every day they woke up, nothing changed.
Postal carrier came by, maybe at the end of the week, no news.
Went farming again.
Woke up, check the chickens.
We live in this time of instant data transmission.
And so we everything is happening substantially much faster than it had in the past for all of these great historical moments, even with World War One and World War II.
So where we are right now, it is we just had three terror attacks in three weeks.
We've had 26, and that's not all of them.
The 26th was just like a quick list compiled like I made through Chat GPT this year, 26.
Nine months in.
So we're looking at two or three terror attacks on average per month.
Will Kane that's uh Jack Pesobic tweeted Bloody September.
Will Kane opened his show calling this bloody September.
If we look back on history at how they condense things and say, this happened, this happened, this happened.
Think about what they would write about September in terms of the concentration of history compared to where we are today.
In September, Charlie Kirk, the most prominent cons prominent non-political conservative personality, technically one of the most probably the most prominent outside of Trump, was assassinated.
Charlie uh a week after the assassination, a man shot up an ABC station, a local television station, because a partisan had been removed from the air.
This is how the history books would write it.
Charlie Kirk is assassinated by a partisan supporting the mainstream Democratic liberal party.
His ideology was in line with trans ideology.
A week later, after a liberal partisan was removed from the airwaves for shocking comments about the assassin blaming the other side for the killing.
A man shot up a local television station and several more threats were made.
A week after that, a man got on a roof and fired onto an ice facility with the intention, according to the evidence, to strike terror into the hearts of ice agents so that they would, I'm paraphrasing, always fear that a sniper could be on any roof or around any corner.
This all happened in the span of a couple of weeks.
But more more importantly, on September 21st, Gavin Newsom ordered federal law enforcement to remove their masks.
Think about what a history book would write about this past month.
They would write the governor of California ordered federal law enforcement to obey his command, remove his mask.
This all occurred at the same time that the state and the federal government were fighting in court over who had control of the National Guard of California.
But if you try to imagine everything from the highest level of politics, again, the most important in my opinion being that Trump and Gavin Newsom are arguing in court over who gets to control the National Guard.
That's where it gets crazy.
These National Guard men and women that Trump is fighting for authority over, which he currently has, live in California.
Yeah, no, I just wanted to say, you know, I don't think that we have any idea, and I just really want to stay focused on the fact that we have Turning Point, who has video footage of exactly what happened.
We also have the FBI who has video footage and surveillance footage from the C C TV videos.
If they want to be the most transparent and honest administration, then they need to release that to the public so that they can prove the theories that they've created and put out there.
And if they don't, well, then I think that there's a lot more to this story.
My name's Ryan Mata, documentary journalist, uh, documentary filmmaker and investigative journalist.
I've uh got about six documentaries out in the last year, and I have another one.
And my main focus is child trafficking.
So if you want to really dive down the rabbit hole and understand what our government's involvement in child trafficking is, uh stay tuned for about two weeks from now.
I'm gonna be dropping a documentary that I think a lot of Americans are waiting for, especially if you've had your children taken from our government.
