← Redacted News
Redacted News
4: What are they hiding? New video evidence in Charlie Kirk's Shooting SHAKES FBI'S case | Redacted
02:01:56
Loading summary
Transcript261 lines
- [00:00]
A
At Energy Trust of Oregon, we understand that energy isn't just what happens when you flip a switch, it's what happens afterwards. It's a home that can provide both shelter and peace of mind. It's a business that can run more efficiently and keep their dream alive. And it's communities that can thrive today and flourish tomorrow. That's energy. And that's why we partner with local utility companies to help you save energy and lower costs. For cash incentives and resources that can help power your life, visit energytrust.org shop the Sherwin Williams Super Sale and get 40% off paints and stains September 19th through the 24th, with prices starting at $29.39. It's the perfect time to transform your space with color.
- [00:42]
B
Whether you're looking to revamp your interior.
- [00:44]
A
Or exterior, we have you covered with bold hues, soothing neutrals, and everything in between. Visit your neighborhood Sherwin Williams store or.
- [00:51]
B
Shop the sale online.
- [00:53]
A
Delivery available on qualifying orders.
- [00:55]
B
Click the banner to learn more.
- [00:56]
A
Retail sales only some exclusions apply. See Store for details.
- [01:16]
B
Welcome to the simulation. Welcome to Redacted, where we help you try to break out of the craziness, the simulation that we all seem to be living in right now. I'm Clayton Morris.
- [01:23]
A
I'm Natalie Morris.
- [01:24]
B
And on today's show, we're going to look more deeply at the video evidence and the indictment of Tyler Robinson. Will it hold up? We here at Redacted have heard from a number of lawyers now, judges particularly, who've told us that there are plenty of loopholes in this and this could be a huge problem for the prosecution. Will this stick? Are there other suspects they should be looking at? We're going to talk about that.
- [01:45]
A
We're also going to talk about Antifa because President Trump has designated it a major terrorist organization. The problem is we don't have domestic terror organizations. We only have foreign ones. So what does this mean? We're going to talk to the man who's been warning us about Antifa for years, Andy Ngo, really excited about this. I read his book a few years ago. Democrats are still saying there's no such thing as antifa. That's cute.
- [02:09]
B
Well, they also say there's no way to fit, you know, join up. Like if you wanted to go to the website and, like, join up with these guys, there's no way to do that. Andy no says that's total bs. There absolutely is a way to join up with antifa. So we're going to break all of that down. We're also going to look at an independent journalist who was there on the scene at Utah Valley University. He went back to the scene because the video evidence and the timeline just didn't add up. And wait till you see what he uncovered. We're going to talk about all of that and more as Redacted starts right now.
- [02:39]
A
But first, first we want to tell you about our friends over at Shopify because the redacted store actually runs on Shopify. It's a great way to launch yourself to the world. So what you're seeing there is the redacted store. Shopify is the back end. They help us put up new products, new ideas. You see that purple there pay button? Anytime you see that on the web, it means that store also runs on Shopify. And that retailer is getting really good service because Shopify is handling everything from graphic design, backend, e commerce, payment acceptance. You don't have to know this stuff because they do. So Again, go to shopify.com redacted if you've got an idea to start a business, and I hope you do. We want prosperity for everybody and success. So figure out how Shopify can help you. Go to shopify.com redacted and sign up for a one month trial period. Again, it's everything you need to grow your business round the clock. Customer support plus design. If you need a hand, someone's there for you. They handle it from soup to nuts, as they say. Shopify.com redacted.
- [03:44]
B
Well, when you listen to the press conference announcing charges against Tyler Robinson, particularly at the state level in Utah, it sounds like an open and shut case, doesn't it? Surveillance footage, text messages, parents that turned him in, an exit wound right out of the neck or shot in the neck, all from the front. All pretty straightforward DNA evidence. Right on the trigger of the gun. They find the gun, they find shell casings with antifa messages written on them. So done. You know, move along here. Nothing to see. The text messages seem like they're pretty darn damning. Laying everything out exactly how he did it, his regrets about doing it, how he felt like he needed to do it, all of it. So just move along. Right?
- [04:23]
A
Very complete story.
- [04:25]
B
Yeah, it's very convenient.
- [04:26]
A
Are you satisfied? Are you not satisfied?
- [04:29]
B
I don't know. I'm not satisfied. But there's emerging video evidence and inconsistencies that paint a totally different picture here. Raise questions, you know, was this guy a patsy that he had perhaps nothing to do with it at all? For one thing, the FBI only released a video that shows the alleged shooter running but the camera on the building would have shown him laying in a prone position firing the shot, as you can see here on, on your screen. So we only get after this individual is running. We don't get him laying in a prone position. We certainly don't get him firing a gun, even though the camera was pointed in that position and would have absolutely covered the prone position of this shooter. The FBI's own video they released on their YouTube channel doesn't show it, but it's alleged in the indictment. They say it, and the Utah state prosecutors say it as well, that they had arm, you know, elbow prints, they have knee prints. He was laying in a prone position and fired this kill shot. One shot. It's all it took. He even saved the shell casing that was found later in the forest. Because it's a bolt action rifle, so you don't pop it out. It would have stayed inside of the rifle. Then they chose, though, to cut off the first few seconds of this video. We'd love to see the actual footage of this, show us him laying there. The thing is, it's happening right at the exact same moment that Charlie Kirk is being shot. When we see him running, we know this because of the timestamp. When you see, of course, the rooftop shot from inside the walkway in the cafe area of the campus. We match that with the video, of course, from inside the university walkway. And you can see him already sprinting as people are ducking. He's already in full sprint as people begin to duck. So he picks up the rifle and runs at just a full sprint. And the people are just now reacting to this.
- [06:15]
A
Again, shows now, do we have the video of him jumping? Because I also have questions about that. When he jumps off, there is a lot of commotion already in the quad area because a shot's been fired and someone's been killed over dead. Why are the people in the background walking so casually at a casual gate if just a corner away from them? People are screaming and running and those people are just walking casually. Does that make sense to you?
- [06:40]
B
There's a lot that doesn't make sense to me. I mean, and what kind of gun? Did he throw the gun down? Did it adjust the scope as he throws it off the roof there? Was he carrying the gun at all? It appears that he is if you look at the high def version of this. But interestingly, the FBI's own website on the their own YouTube channel shows this. After he shot and killed Charlie Kirk, he jumped off the roof and ran away. He left a gun and ammunition in a wooded area near the university. This is the YouTube video that the FBI published initially, and I hadn't caught this before, but they're saying clearly in this video he shot and killed Charlie Kirk. He, in this video is the one that we're after. He jumped off and ran away. He shot and killed Charlie Kirk. Well, how do you know that at this point, when you publish this video, how do you know that he's the one specifically that shot and killed Charlie Kirk? Where in this video does it show it? Please show it to us. So the FBI's own YouTube channel says this. There's a lot of other evidence I want to get to here in a moment, but I want to do, I do want to bring in an ex prosecutor, U.S. marine John Deaton, former U.S. senate candidate, who knows these things inside and out, both from the defense position and on the offensive position as a prosecutor. John, thank you for joining us. Welcome to the show.
- [07:55]
C
Thank you for having me. It's my pleasure.
- [07:58]
B
So I guess as a, when you're, as a defender, as a defense attorney specifically, maybe put on your defense attorney hat for a second here and you're looking at this indictment both at the federal level, at the state level, you see a lot of loopholes here. What are they?
- [08:13]
C
Well, the first thing is we've learned that the suspect, this guy has not cooperated. So if that's true, then there's no confession. Normally in a situation like this, the FBI would rush to get a confession, you know, which alleviates a lot of the loopholes that you're starting to point at. And so really what you're engaging here doing right now for your audience is exactly asking questions where the dots the government cannot connect. And listen, to execute someone, you're going to have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. So the government's going to have to answer some of these questions. Where is the rifle? Where's the videos? Defense attorney, first thing I'm going to want to do is hit the government with discovery requests that says give me every video. What about neighborhood cameras, all the ring cameras? And then you start basically working backwards to establish a timeline and whether or not you can poke reasonable doubt holes in that time timeline.
- [09:15]
B
I'm just very focused on this indictment and the loopholes that defense would have to push here because you're already seeing the lack of evidence from the video side. We're seeing there was a camera right behind Charlie Kirk. Where is that video evidence that would show the trajectory of the bullets? There's apparently a tpusa individual who took the camera down has that information. You can see here, he grabs it right out of the back of the tent and then puts it in a bag. I know Candace Owens has been asking, hey, can we see this footage, please? It would certainly answer the questions which trajectory this bullet came from. In addition to which, we also have now evidence that the university has already been doing construction work on the exact site. So we have overhead camera footage now showing like, they're actively almost, like, taking over this crime scene. I mean, this is, to my mind, still a crime scene. So now the university is already paving over this entire area. What would you say as a defense attorney?
- [10:12]
C
I would say that the first motions I would be filing was a spoliation motion under the law. And if the government can't produce that evidence, then you would get a spoliation charge where the judge would say to the jury, the government did not secure this evidence. You can assume that it was not in favor of the government's theory of the case, and therefore the evidence has been spoiled. You can, as a defense attorney, I would play zero in on the person jumping off the roof saying, is the gun, you know, and then you break it down in the milliseconds of, he didn't have time to break that rifle down. The rifle would not fit in his backpack, regardless, where is the rifle? And you know, that that's one big issue where then you start getting a chalkboard and saying, reasonable doubt, number one, reasonable doubt number two. And you just list out all this evidence piecemeal.
- [11:10]
A
Now, I have one more question about how the FBI is kind of peeing in the pool here because they're showing up for media appearances, which continues to change the narrative. Cash Patel even saying he was there to begin with is getting in the way of investigators. What does that hand a defense in terms of what they're saying? I mean, we all know any kind of litigation, you need to be quiet to make your best case.
- [11:37]
C
Absolutely. And the fact that Cash Patel tweeted out immediately that they had the suspect, when in fact they didn't. They had that George Zinn fella, the elderly guy, acting as a decoy. You can make a big mountain of evidence just out of that. And then you start getting into other theories of alternate explanations that caused Charlie Death rush to judgment. Listen, this isn't a slam dunk. And listen, Charlie Kirk deserves justice. Anyone who was in there deserves justice be brought to justice. I should say that was involved in this assassination. But, you know, Cash Patel, quite frankly, objectively, is getting in his own way.
- [12:24]
A
So what you're saying. Sorry, go ahead.
- [12:26]
B
No, I want to ask you, before we let you go here, from a Marine perspective, that's, you know, part of your background as well. Not just as a prosecutor and defense attorney, but when you hear, when you see that timeline and you see this individual in full sprint mode and when you match up the timestamps and seeing he's in full sprint mode, when the people in the audience are just about to start ducking, like, does that comport with what your experience in the military would be, sort of a pop up and take off really that fast with a rifle after a shot like that?
- [12:55]
C
No, not at all. And that's what I meant by they're gonna. Defense attorney will slow the video up and highlight everything that you're highlighting to drive that reasonable doubt. But, but it doesn't match your own common sense. And then obviously you're going to get trained professionals as expert witnesses who can also poke holes in it, that it's just inconsistent with reality.
- [13:22]
B
All right, John Deaton, we appreciate you joining us as we're unpacking this, but something just is not adding up here. We're hearing from judges and lawyers just like yourself who are saying there's a lot of problems with this case right now, you know, so we're gonna see, we're gonna see if this individual walks free because they've screwed this up so badly. John, great to see you. Thank you so much.
- [13:41]
C
Thank you for having me. Have a great day.
- [13:44]
A
All right, well, we're gonna talk about Antifa now because the Trump administration has declared that Antifa is a terrorist organization. Notice he uses the term major terrorist organization. And he says that he will be strongly recommending that anyone funding Antifa be investigated. Well, okay. Liberal organizations are saying antifa is literally not real. That's convenient for them to say because they don't have to admit that there's an extremist version of leftism. Antifa is very much real. Our next guest has been one of antifa's main targets. He wrote the book Unmasked Inside Antifa's Radical Plan to Destroy Democracy. It's terrifying. I read it myself. Andy Ngo is the author and he joins us today. Thank you so much for joining us. You must feel very validated, at least that the government is now acknowledging this existence because the Biden administration pretended that there was no antifa.
- [14:43]
D
I do. But at the same time, I realize that moving forward there's going to be a lot of work that needs to be done and it's going to be really challenging for the administration. They're going to have to be very creative and have the result to withstand all the legal challenges. The lies from the media, which we're seeing immediately, as you said a moment ago, they're saying two things at the same time. One, that Antifa is a figment of the far right's imagination, and then two, that if they do exist, they're peaceful racial justice protesters, while I'm a testament of one of their many victims of their violence. And they've killed people, they've committed terrorist attacks, they've been involved in nihilistic violence, mass shootings, and they have, as part of their apparatus, protection from the mainstream media. So they're going to lean into that a lot. And I hope that people push back against the lies. I think also to contextualize the announcement from President Trump, he's not passing a new law. This is not an executive order. It's really a declaration of how he is going to be directing the DOJ and his administration to be handling this domestic terrorist network. And there are already legislation on the books right now that can go after and dismantle some of these networks. RICO conspiracy in using interstate communications to make threat of bodily injury like those are all on the federal legislation. And there's even blueprints that you can look at at the local level that people aren't even aware of. For example, last year In San Diego, California, of all places, San Diego county, the DA's office there was able to convict 12 out of 12 identified members of SoCal Antifa. It went to trial and everyone either was convicted through plea deals or at trial. Some of them were sentenced to prison or jail. So there's a precedent there. There's also a precedent from the Biden administration going after a far right decentralized terror network that operated almost exactly as antifa directing targets that they wanted to see killed, sending out sympathizers to carry out attacks. And that group, it's called Terragram, has been formally designated by the State Department as terrorists. And the individuals they identified were sanctioned as well by the State Department. So the Trump administration has to work very hard with the DOJ as well as Department of State to make sure that the networks are dismantled. I know that Antifa is going to buy their time. They're thinking in three years they want to get in a different administration and then all of it will be ignored once again.
- [17:41]
B
Yeah. Now you've been over the past 24 hours really on a crusade because you knew this was coming. And you said, here are the lies, they're going to start spinning immediately. And one of the things you talked about is that it's decentralized and there's really no way to join up. Like I can't just go to a website and sign up for Antifa and become a card carrying member. But you shot that down. Can you explain, explain why that's a total fallacy?
- [18:08]
D
Well, so what we can expect media and liberals to do is well, who's the leader of Antifa, what's their website, how do I become a member? And they do that because it's meant to be misleading. There is no antifa.com that will lead you to a place where you can register to become a member. It doesn't work like that. I brought up specifically the example of Rose City Antifa because that's the Antifa group that operates in Portland, Oregon where I'm from and who have committed acts of violent criminality against me and the public. And you can see on their website, I don't know if they begin changing the language, by the way, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these websites started going down. But you can see in the Q and A, how do you become a member or reach out. They also put a warning out to the public that hey to their comrades. Rather, hey, if somebody identifies themselves as with Rose City Antifa, get in touch with us, we can verify. So you can see that they do know who is a member, who is not. And they've had Project Veritas a number of years ago had somebody who infiltrated Rocid Antifa as a perplexity, as a recruit and was ultimately rejected because they didn't think, they didn't see him willing to commit acts of criminality. So there are certain cells that are very organized. They also are diffused in the, in a way that you can think of radical Islam. You know, not, not every radical jihadist is a part of Al Qaeda or is or Al Shabad. The radicalized individual can be literally one person who's consumed the propaganda online and has decided to take up violent direct action.
- [19:49]
A
Now something you write about in your book is how Antifa was born out of opposition to the Nazis. So now this leftist argument becomes Hitler banned Antifa. Now we see how Trump has this parallel because Antifa, they say is just some sort of government opposition. You know, violence is still illegal. You still, they, they use what you say, innocuous weapons like umbrellas, frozen water bottles, something you, can you explain called milkshakes, which is a fast Food cup filled with cement that you can throw at someone as a weapon. So, you know, do we need to make this distinction about Hitler and the Nazis? Is this even worthwhile?
- [20:28]
D
So, first of all, Antifa steal a legacy from the Second World War that they actually do not inherit. The Antifa, the original one was a communist paramilitary in the Weimar Republic. They were involved in a lot of violence and they actually had a big role in destabilizing the Weimar Republic, in making the public look to figures like Hitler for stability. Antifa tried to claim that, oh, that's what we sort of inherit. The anti fascists who fought against Nazis, some of them are dishonest in their propaganda and they'll use images of American soldiers in Europe and say those were Antifa. Unlike them, the contemporary movement is from the 80s. It's relatively new, I mean, decades old now. And what they do is that their ideology is actually a bit in terms of how they identify who's a fascist. It's very wide and that's intentional. And many of their targets have actually been individuals on the left, liberals who are not comfortable with political violence. They view those people as fascists and Nazis. They say it, if you're willing to talk with a Nazi and they consider people like Charlie Cook, you and I, Nazis, that therefore you become one too, and you're going to be a target as well. So there's no connection to the Second World War. It's just a stolen legacy and they use that to justify their own violence. And you see the trans activists doing this as well. They say the original Stonewall was a riot and those people wouldn't have gotten their rights without violence. Therefore, we need to be violent today. So all of it is just about by any means necessary, whatever lies they need to say, whatever history they need to do revisionism on to justify their violent, criminal political agenda today.
- [22:20]
B
Well, Andy, I know you're extremely busy because once this story hit, everyone wanted to talk to you. The man that understands Antifa better than just about anyone. Our guest has been Andy Ngo. He's the author of Inside Antifa's Radical Plan to Destroy Democracy. And really a hero for his reporting on all of this. Man, they came after you tough. Andy, thank you so much for taking some time out. I know you're over in the UK right now, it's late at night, but thank you so much.
- [22:45]
D
My pleasure. Thank you.
- [22:47]
A
Yeah, read the book, you guys. I mean, he tells some terrible, terrifying stories. He himself was beat up. He talks about how they are disproportionately Trans. So they are radicalized to believe that they are fighting for their own sexual freedom and oppression inside the system. The one thing I want to say.
- [23:04]
E
Though, like, on the Rose City. The Rose City Antifa. So I have like. Like a. Kind of a personal story, like I won't name names or anything, but somebody that, that I know he had went to see a speaker. Just like somebody. I think the guy was like, talking about, like, questioning the. The official Holocaust numbers. And so he just went to see that speaker and Ro. City Antifa hounded him for. For well over 10 years. Just a. Just an individual who. All he did was went to see somebody talking and they would, like, take pictures of him. They just hounded him for years.
- [23:35]
A
Yeah. Here's one thing I wanted to ask him about, and he was on a tight schedule, so I didn't. The Constitution makes it legally very risky to label American groups as terrorist organizations. And you can see why, because you might want to have a group of dudes over who want to talk about your rights to display the flag. Right. Under the Biden administration, Keir Starmer's administration in the uk that could be designed as extremists. And then the government starts tracking you as a terrorist. We don't really want the government to be able to do this. Remember when Joe Biden said that. What did he call him? Mag. Extremists are the number one threat.
- [24:17]
B
White supremacists.
- [24:20]
A
And so you can see how this is scary. So what will the Trump administration, administration do to expand their power in an effort to police crimes that are already crimes?
- [24:31]
B
Well, I would love to. Yeah, we could talk to lawyers about that and maybe some constitutional attorneys about that. But, you know, yesterday we learned verifiably that the Biden administration was targeting conservative groups.
- [24:44]
A
Right.
- [24:44]
B
We just learned that yesterday. They didn't announce that they didn't do it out in the public.
- [24:50]
A
Yeah.
- [24:50]
B
They didn't put it on the US State Department's website.
- [24:52]
A
Right.
- [24:53]
B
They did it in a clandestine manner. They went after and targeted conservative groups. And we also know from the FBI that they were targeting, you know, prayer services and PTA meetings and things like that when you had literally millions of illegal immigrants that had poured across the borders. We had massive child sex trafficking operations in the United States States that the Biden administration ignored and actually helped facilitate. But they did all of this in private. So at least here we get the Trump administration saying, we are designating this group as a domestic terror organization. We're going to study. And now they're going to have to go after their financing. That's the big piece of this. Right. Who's actually funding them?
- [25:33]
A
Which yes, is in the book, read Andy's book.
- [25:35]
B
Is it flow through back from Soros? I mean, we know about these different protests that have been funneled and pro and, and supported and funded by George Soros and the like to create these sort of rabble rousers in different cities. So yeah, maybe their time in the sun is coming to a close. So.
- [25:51]
A
Right.
- [25:51]
B
All right, we got more news to get to here. On your Thursday, we are going to talk about did they get the wrong guy? In Utah Valley University, we have an independent journalist who just went back to the university and really is like the only journalist who was actually able to film the locations and said, you know, something doesn't add up here at all. And we have a lot of questions about this. We're going to talk about the drones as well because new reporting on the multiple drones over this area during the shooting. During like, right during and after the shooting. We're going to talk about that as well. But first we want to tell you about our friends over at Brightcore because I don't know if you know that microplastics are infiltrating every part of our lives. Scientists estimate we now consume a credit card store worth of plastic every single week through our food, water, even the air we breathe. One study found plastic particles in 100% of human lung samples. You don't want that. Nobody is safe from exposure. It gets worse though. These plastics don't just sit in your body. They cross the gut lining, they leach into your blood and they disrupt everything. But there's one thing that actually can help stop it, and that's right, it is actually fermented foods. Kimchi. And our friends at Brightcor have created Kimchi one, which is a potent ally in this toxic world. It's packaged with over 900 probiotic strains unique to kimchi. And it's proven scientifically, proven to break down these plastics, these BPAs and help you detox from the inside out. It doesn't support diet. It doesn't just support digestion. It helps protect your cells, your brain, your hormones, your future. Your body was never meant to handle plastic, but your gut was designed to protect you. So you just have to give it the right tools in order to, to do that. Right now you can get 25% off with our code redacted if you use the link below. If you go to redacted.inc or excuse me. Yeah. Mybrightcore.com redacted. Mybrightcore.com redacted. You get 25% off. You get 50% off though. If you get on the phone with them and you call them and you'll get a free bottle of vitamin D3 as well. Just call them. 1-888-404-6312 and you'll get free shipping as well. Yeah, you'll get 50% off and free shipping. So go to mybrightcore.com redacted or call them and save even more money. 888-404-6312.
- [28:05]
A
All right. We also want to tell you about Lear Capital because you probably have seen that the price of precious metals has been sky skyrocketing. We know that every dollar that the government spends is a tax on us. In fact, my favorite president, Calvin Coolidge said exactly that. For every dollar I don't save, American people, the working people have to work harder. We're here. They're still doing it. We're on a dangerous path with record spending, endless global conflicts. Ukraine, Russia, Iran, all of it fueled by government printing press running on fumes. War is expensive and it steals from us. You know this.
- [28:41]
B
And the Fed yesterday of all things.
- [28:44]
A
Just weakened the dollar further at the behest of a money hungry, cookie monster type government. But if you are hedging your bets and investing in precious metal, then this will give you peace of mind. In fact, Goldman Sachs is already predicting that gold could hit 4, $500 an ounce by 2026. Because the smart money is moving. Central banks, billionaires, institutional investors, they're not waiting. They're protecting themselves. And so are we. We have been investing in metals for years now. Our portfolio looks quite good. Much better than the US Dollar. I'm not trying to do a victory lap, but we've been trying to tell you this for a long time. So please call our friends over at Lear. They will help you learn this. You can call them at 800-613-3557 and in fact, that is the way I suggest you get a hold of them. Because they are so personable, so willing to hear your story, so willing to teach you. They have all the time in the world. You can also reach them at least. Learedacted.com if you're not a phone picker upper. But I really think that once you have a personal conversation you're gonna miss, feel much better about this. No pressure, just facts. Just learn this and see what it can do for you and your family. Again, the number is 800-6133-5-55-7, or go to learredacted.com. no one's gonna protect your money, but you do it now before the next crisis hits.
- [30:08]
B
All right, well, is Tyler Robinson the lone gunman or a patsy just meant to take the fall? The FBI of pretty, pretty quickly showing the alleged shooter running on the rooftop. But of course, the camera only doesn't show him at all laying in a prone position. The video that the FBI released doesn't show him laying in a prone position. They only released the video after he's already sprinting. So we don't have him actually firing the gun. But the FBI's own video doesn't show it. So we don't see him laying there shooting the weapon. Even though in the video description of the YouTube video on the WEF, the FBI's own website, own YouTube channel, it specifically says, look, they shot him after he shot and killed Charlie Kirk. He jumped off and ran away. This says right inside the FBI's own video.
- [31:03]
A
Not even allegedly.
- [31:05]
B
Yeah, not even allegedly. And they also said it's a man. So he said this guy, he shot and killed Charlie Kirk and then ran off, jumped off the roof right there. So that's on that very same video. But of course, we don't see that in the video. So why is the FBI holding back those few seconds of video at the beginning that would show him actually firing the weapon? It's all very curious. And then, of course, they chose to cut off the first few seconds of that video. And then if you notice the sprinting time or when the shots are fired and you lose, look at the videos from inside the campus and the cafe walkway specifically overlooking the campus. You can see this person on the roof is already in full sprint mode, even before the crowd ducks down. So this is an incredibly fast individual that pulls off a shot, jumps up, and is already in full sprint before people even have a time to react to it. This guy's like the Flash, Barry Allen or something. Now, Blake Bednars is an independent journalist who went back to the scene of the crime. I think he's the only one that's done this, by the way, in the entire country. To film all of these locations and to give us an accurate understanding of where these cameras are, where the building locations are. And could this individual have pulled this off? And Blake joins us now because I guess, Blake, something didn't sit right with you. Is that why you went back there?
- [32:26]
F
Well, first off, thanks for having me on the program today. I need to clarify some things because I have not Left Texas. I have been here at my home this entire time. So I believe there was probably some just guessing on the fact that I had a really clear video. And it probably was just assumed that the only way I had that video was that I went back and shot it with my phone. But in fact, that video is the live stream that a gentleman by the name of that one right there by Adam Bartholomew. And Adam Bartholomew showed up early and was there during and after the shot, this whole episode. So.
- [33:19]
B
Okay, but.
- [33:21]
F
And so I messaged him, and I said, hey, man, I've got, like, some really good computers and stuff. Would you mind if I got that full file from you? And he's like, sure. He's like, let me know what you find. So he sent it over. I downloaded it, and it took me all of about three minutes before the first drone went flying in front of my face on my computer. And so fast forward to where I literally had an epiphany moment. It's after the shooting. And I'm not a journalist. I'm a normal dude that I run insurance agency. Like, I'm not a journalist. I'm someone that's got a brain and literally, just a curious. Yeah, I mean, like, look, we're at a very pivotal point in our country, and. And we want the truth. The people want the truth. So I see the vantage point that I've not seen before, and I see the camera on the. The building where the FBI got the footage from. And I'm like, well, that's strange. And I'm already playing on Google Earth. It literally hit me, like, I can't even describe it. It was like, oh, my word. Like, no one. And I always check to see if anyone's talking about this, because I don't want to try and bring up something I was like, this is not in anybody's conversation. I said, why are we not. The FBI already has the money shot. The frame is there. They've got the money shot. It's not the fact that, oh, well, he jumped down a level or two and then, you know, he's disappeared. No, the camera captures everything. The camera even captures the building beyond it. So you have the roof line. There's. There is no doubt. And I'm first. I'm really upset that we're in this state where it's. Everyone is bickering and there's a lot of jab jabs going on, and I'm like, my goodness, this could all be settled if they just would release the damn video of him climbing up on the roof, going over there, hanging out on the roof will be able to see the gun being fired, all of this stuff. And yet they don't. They release a video that is at 12:23 as he's in stride traversing the flat roof. And it really, in my opinion, it really boils down and it really hits home a point that they do not want us to see something otherwise.
- [36:08]
A
Can I ask you, the 1223 is when the shot was taken. Allegedly. That's. We know that that's when Charlie Kirk took a bullet from somebody at 12:23. The video we see is him running across the roof and jumping off. Can we play that? And what bothers me the most about that is if this is within 30 seconds of him taking that shot, allegedly. And the crowd disperses, everyone's screaming. Why are the people behind those tree lines walking so casually? If something like that just happened, people would be screaming and running. If you're there, you're going to run too. You don't even know why. Right. And so this tells me that those people. I can't put that together.
- [36:58]
F
No, it's tough. You really get a good sense of things where if there was a shot that was fired on that roof line, it would be tremendously loud for all of those people walking there, not where it was down, kind of in an amphitheater style get together area at the university there. So yes, I mean, you're correct in what you're kind of concluding to there. And I mean literally, I'll take one further. If you have your producers, if anyone's able to put up on screen the video from inside the flag room, which is, they're inside looking. Okay. So if you'll put that video there side by side with the FBI's video and have them not run concurrently but consecutively with that one there running first, you've got a pretty good, you've got a pretty, pretty, pretty good timeline of the entire sequence of events. Maybe missing three or four strides. I'm going to go ahead and say you've got. And you can see kind of a sequence there. I don't like how they did that little pan there either. I wish they would just keep it full frame.
- [38:15]
B
No, but what you're saying is. Yeah, what you're saying is if you. And we don't have the ability to put them side by side in our live show like this, unfortunately. But what your point is is that we're already seeing these people ducking. He's already running. And you match that up with a stride from the FBI's video. And you can match those strides and actually get that timeline very precise.
- [38:36]
A
So the people in a room would duck, but people just, I'm gonna say 30ft away would just be like, hmm, that's exactly. It doesn't. So.
- [38:46]
F
No, it doesn't.
- [38:49]
A
So let's totally speculate because this may be the most obvious, but anybody could run for that footage, just do a running jump because the FBI wants. So it's possible this is not real. I mean, it seems like the most obvious thing to say. Right. But I'm just going to ask it.
- [39:07]
F
Well, so what I look at is, and what I've been. And we all have been forced fed is that the person disassembled a Mauser rifle up on the roof. They left a screwdriver. That's widely reported. I'm telling you right now, I saw a gentleman disassemble a Mauser. And it is, it is not something that you can. I would love if he would do it running on a roof. It's impossible. I don't see any sort of.
- [39:42]
G
Any.
- [39:43]
F
Sort of working on a gun, taking it apart, putting it in a backpack. It's absent. It's completely absent. So that's why it. And I might do this in a little bit, is run the two videos where one inside the flag room runs and then it cuts directly to the FBI's because at that point it becomes completely, completely clear that he did not break down a weapon. You, you have to turn screws many times. I don't know if you have done any, you know, handyman work around your house and you've got a screw there. I mean, like it. Imagine doing it in one of the most intense pressure situations that this young man would have hypothetically been in. It's. It's crazy. I mean, and if none of us.
- [40:35]
B
Did break it down, I mean, because, you know, we have that video and we had, you know, former FBI whistleblower on the other day says to him, it's clear as day that he's carrying a fully a full weapon off the roof. So I, you know, again, that part of it we can, we can go back and forth and is it in the woods and was it ever disassembled? It doesn't. I don't know.
- [40:54]
F
Well, I don't know. Yep.
- [40:56]
A
The timeline of the text messages is referencing things that are supposed to happen tomorrow. And that doesn't. They haven't given us timestamps. It's clear in the text message between him and his alleged lover that they've cherry picked certain things for us to see. So I guess we're supposed to think that he was somewhere in hiding for a full day and then told him what was going to happen the next day. It doesn't make any sense. Someone in the chat is saying, guns are not that loud, so those people maybe wouldn't be running yet. But the crowd screams immediately. The screams are immediate. So maybe not the. The gun, but the. Right.
- [41:35]
F
The. And this is where honestly, I've kicked around the idea, tossed it with a couple of people, that we really need more data. And I don't know if it would be something where we throw in like a cash prize for college kids to upload their footage and see some. Some college kid or spectator there that they captured something and they might not even know it. Right. And unfortunately, with Snapchat and the there's just a few different little pieces aside from Mr. Bartholomew's video that everyone just is passing around re editing and trying to, you know, slow down and highlight this section and that set. I mean, it really becomes like, you know, where.
- [42:26]
B
No, I know. And that's why I wanted to have you on, because I think you've done what other people haven't done, which is I want to see those camera angles that you were able to analyze.
- [42:34]
F
Right.
- [42:34]
B
And I think the most important piece of what you did, Blake, is showing that camera from Bartholomew's video, showing that, in fact, that camera on that building on that one side, as you, as you pointed out in the video, absolutely would have shown the prone position of the shooter. Why did the FBI then not give it to us in that video? It's not motion activated camera. It was capturing everything. Right. It's like a ring doorbell camera.
- [43:01]
F
Someone deliberately picked. Someone deliberately chose to start a trim of that video at that moment. I do all of my company's IT work. Okay. If I'm trying to showcase something or if I need to show a suspicious person or break in in my security cameras are up here. I go in and I trim the exact parts that I need to show. Someone did that in this instance, and someone deliberately did not want to show moments before or minutes leading up to 1223. And that was deliberate. There's no way around it. They didn't be like, oh, let's just pick here where he's kind of running. It would put to bed a lot of talk, so to speak, if they would do this, because it really would show. It's basically putting your money where your mouth is in the regard of kind of showing how he did all of this.
- [44:07]
B
Can I ask you? Well, you mentioned the drones and a lot of people in our chat room want to know about the drones. Jason Goodman has done some pretty interesting analysis of this. Kind of went viral last night. I think he's speculating maybe three, maybe four unmanned drones. I don't know if we have an exact, exact number yet. But as you were analyzing this live stream footage on your own, what did you see? You said you were shocked when you saw a drone just go right by in the footage.
- [44:32]
F
Yeah, so I sat on this information. I've known about the drone since the weekend and I've just been, I've been trying to reach out to people that are of a much more following than I do to bring it to their attention. Say, hey, we've got something here, let me show you. No one would give me the time of day, but I immediately. Aside from the one. So there's one flyby that he, he's got referenced there and it's right at about the time of the shot. And the, the drone comes crazy, crazy, just right out in front of the crowd. But I mean, just today I found two new drones and I just put them up on my Twitter page about maybe two hours ago. And this is right at the time of, well after the shot. And these two drones are flashing through the sky at, I mean, super, super fast speeds. It's. It really defies any logic. But the only thing I can deduce is the fact that they're shooting in some sort of thousand frames a second to be able to see what they're flying over in some sort of FPV pilot, what he's, what he's seeing. But there are, I can say definitively there's 18 instances that I uncovered a drone in the sky. On two of those occasions, I have multiple drones in the same frame. And the most that, that are, there are three at one time. So I don't know if they all could be different. It could be the same ones flying over and over again. I don't know.
- [46:34]
B
I just know or coordinating together. I mean, I know that's, that's a question. Were these drones coordinating?
- [46:39]
F
It is a question. They're flying so fast that it would be very difficult to know without being on the other end of the communication of whoever the pilot in control is of that, of that vehicle. So, so I, I can't explain it, but it's there. And so that's why this became so important because this takes on a whole nother narrative of what people. Because the first question I would be asking to authorities is, okay, so which one of Tyler's little posse was flying the drone? Who was doing that?
- [47:22]
B
Right.
- [47:22]
F
Oh. Oh, it wasn't. Oh, who was it?
- [47:25]
B
Easy to track, right? It's very easy to track someone.
- [47:29]
F
Someone needs to come forward and claim responsibility. They're there. I mean, this video was uploaded to YouTube. It was live streamed. Mr. Bartholomew's done nothing to it. None of us have. I mean, you can go on YouTube. And I have provided all the timestamps where I found every flash.
- [47:50]
B
Yeah, it's all public.
- [47:52]
F
It's public. Just check. Check my work. I went through and divided out frame by frame, and then I actually asked AI to find me black specs in the sky and identified the frame. It's kind of freaky how I did this. I identified each frame of where there was an anomaly that wasn't a cloud because it was a beautiful, clear blue day with minimal clouds. So it was easy for AI to recognize. So it turned around and kicked out right where I should go. But I didn't. Like, I stopped looking after the shot until today when I went back on there. And the. The two drones are flying. This is when they're sweeping the roof. You can see four to seven different law enforcement individuals on the roof. Where he jumped, not at that corner. And that's where they flash. And then I honestly believe they probably stopped flying because there was a. I don't know if it was a Cessna or a Super Cub that was flying fairly low, just above 400 or so, and it probably grounded them or I don't know. But he cut his stream off. So that is right now, the best. I mean, there's stuff being uncovered all the time. I just saw something a moment ago about a guy with a badge, law enforcement taking his badge off. We got it on video, right?
- [49:28]
A
Yeah.
- [49:29]
B
Another individual in the crowd with a gun. We have that on camera as well. With a handgun now. You know, it is Utah, so you could. There probably a lot of armed people there, but yeah, a lot of questions.
- [49:40]
F
I've never known a law enforcement individual to take their badge off and hide it in their pocket when on a crime someone's recording them. Yes, it's very interesting. There's so many anomalies. Look, we all saw what happened. I was absolutely. It was visceral. I actually think I let out a yell because it was so visceral. And I think that's why this has deeply affected everyone. If you have a heart and a conscience that it's wrong and it's disturbing.
- [50:18]
B
Well, yeah, I want to say thank you. I mean, you're just a guy with an insurance company who became a citizen journalist and uncovered this with massive amounts of high definition video and put pieces together. I mean, that's how this works.
- [50:33]
A
You're the next generation of discoverers that you pick up a torch of JFK conspiracy knowers who were. Right.
- [50:43]
B
Yeah.
- [50:43]
A
Right. And so think of what that generation of mostly men would have done with the tools that you've got now. So I feel like you do them proud, you know? Are you ready to join the ranks of citizen research researchers like this? How do you feel about that?
- [50:59]
F
No, I. I totally. I think it's. It's. And I said this to Mr. Bartholomew. I said, man, your name could possibly come, like, be synonymous with the. Is it the Zapruder film or. It's a brooder. Yeah, Yeah. I was like. I mean, this literally has those types of. It's that. That kind of weight. He was like, really? I was like, man, I was like, yes, you got some crazy stuff on here that's very. It's unexplainable, and it points in a totally different direction. And. But now when it comes to just speaking up and look, we. We live in the greatest nation on earth, y', all. And this is what Charlie Kirk stood for. I mean, this was. This right here was the ability to speak and speak freely, no matter what your point of view is, and have that just debate. And that's like, we have to have that as a society and as a nation. And when it comes to just speaking up and reporting and. And calling out inconsistencies and problems, people have to do it. We have to. I mean, even little low people in Lubbock, Texas, like myself, that's just. I mean, just someone that notices something or just wants to take a deeper dive into things. It's. It's crazy when you just really focus in. And. And that's the other thing. I don't have any distractions. I'm not talking. I don't know anything about Israel. I don't. I don't know any of that.
- [52:33]
B
I mean, like, that's a good place to be.
- [52:35]
A
Yeah.
- [52:36]
F
Yeah.
- [52:36]
B
Clear your head and be able to focus on this.
- [52:38]
F
And I don't have all these distractions over here of other nations and things of that nature. And I'm just looking at what went on. Like, yeah, I have a different focal length. I mean, it's.
- [52:48]
B
Well, that's why I wanted to have you on, Blake. I mean, with what you uncovered in this video is important. It's another piece of this puzzle. So thank you for your work. Sorry for mentioning that you were. You were on campus there. I knew you were in Lubbock, but I wasn't, you know, sure if you had gotten back here or not.
- [53:02]
F
Just resourceful, you know, that's the beauty of it, is being resourceful.
- [53:08]
B
Well, Blake, thank you so much for this continued work. Continued. Great work on this. I'm going to call you a citizen journalist, because that's exactly what you are. Thank you for this. And thanks for your time today, Blake. I really appreciate it.
- [53:18]
F
Pleasure to be with you both.
- [53:19]
B
Yep.
- [53:19]
F
Have a good rest of your day.
- [53:20]
B
Thanks, Blake.
- [53:21]
A
He's nailing that. I mean, these are worth asking.
- [53:25]
B
Someone in the chat room says we're all Zapruders now. Right? I mean, you know, now some.
- [53:29]
A
Some of the comments are saying, oh, redacted. Is too scared to mention the exit wound. That's not what he was studying. We have other guests who have absolutely done that. We are going to do that. We need to ask the people who are experts about that. So don't tell me we're afraid. We are absolutely not.
- [53:47]
B
No. And I should. Let me just be clear about this. There's lots of different pieces of this story, right? This, in the interview that we just did with Blake is about the camera angles. That's what I wanted to focus on with him and the drones that he captured in this video, this live stream that he was able to pinpoint. But I specifically wanted to focus with him on what he uncovered, which was the camera angle on the building, which would have shown the prone position of the shooter and the missing few seconds of video that was missing from the FBI's video. So that's what I wanted to focus on with him. And that, to me, is very, very important piece of this story. Exit wounds, that's a different question. We've covered that part of the story, so.
- [54:25]
A
And we will continue because I think that new. Why don't we have an autopsy? Why don't we. Yeah.
- [54:31]
B
People in the chat are like, where the hell's the autopsy? Where's the medical examiner's report?
- [54:35]
A
Yeah, I want those things. We are. We're not going to this. We're not done, guys. So just have a little patience because there's a lot to stick with. I have to say. I. You know, there's a lot of this where I'm like, I don't want to look this acutely at it because it's too upsetting. And then on the other hand, I feel like we have a duty to do it. I was telling Clayton today, like, I don't know that I'm cut out for this. I'm a. I'm a woman, and I'm so connected to the loss of his kids that I'm finding this really challenging. But we're gonna have to do it whether we want to or not. And so, yeah. Yeah, we're not done.
- [55:09]
B
No, it'd be terrible if we just, like, sweep this under the rug and, like, let's move along. Let's take the official narrative from the FBI. The FBI lies to us at every turn, but now we're supposed to. We're supposed to believe everything they're telling us. I mean, literally, Kash Patel on the stand lied to Congress. Thomas Massie had to call him out to his face. Like, we're gonna believe the official narrative on all of this. Yeah. Occam's Razor seems to be the most. You know, make the most sense. Right? He texted his friend, he texted his lover. He was on the rooftop carrying this out. He's the one that took his father's grandfather's bolt action rifle. He rode all sorts of nasty things on cases. He's the only one. He's the only one. Like, it's a very convenient and clean case until there's video evidence that emerges that shows, no, it's not as clean as you're pretending it to be.
- [55:56]
A
Right.
- [55:57]
B
And the FBI. You know, when people say the FBI lies, they lie by omission. They're not overtly lying. What are they hiding? Why would you.
- [56:06]
A
They're allowed to lie to you.
- [56:07]
B
Yeah, they are allowed to lie to you. It's part of their tactic. But they also lie by omission by what they don't tell us.
- [56:13]
A
Right.
- [56:14]
B
You're leaving out key parts of this story.
- [56:15]
A
So somebody says, you don't care about Charlie. You never did. And we don't tell each other how we feel here.
- [56:21]
B
What?
- [56:21]
A
That's not something that we do. So how do you know how I feel about it? And also, I wanna point out that plenty of people who did not know the work of Charlie Kirk have learned it in the last week and become very moved by it. So you can kiss my butt for that. You don't know how I feel, and I don't know how you feel.
- [56:39]
B
I mean, I interviewed Charlie many times. To say that you don't care about Charlie. I mean, you can have political disagreements with someone, but this was an assassination of a major. One of the major reasons that President Trump was elected. This is a major assassination of a political organizer that led to the presidency of Donald Trump. Like, there's a direct connection there. This is a major story that needs to be covered. So you can have disagreements with Charlie. I never had any disagreements with him.
- [57:07]
A
And I think most of us who are women and mothers and wives see this and take it very personally that somebody, her husband was taken from her, who she had planned to raise these two babies with. And every time, this is the thing that's haunting me because I was just even thinking about it. I watched the clock turn 12:23 today and think, it's been a week now that we've been through this. And every time her phone dings, it's gonna hurt her that it's not him, because that's the only one that she's gonna. I just can't stop feeling it for her. And that's a human response. So it doesn't matter what I thought of his politics. Maybe I can share that with you another time. But this is a story that we are all owed an answer to.
- [57:47]
B
Well, yeah, I mean, I just want to say I did disagree with him on his positions over the past few months on Israel, so specifically. But then it's funny because it was amazing to sort of watch him moderate those positions and then invite people like Dave Smith and Tucker Carlson to his events and actually were able to start calling out these sort of the tyranny of the Israel lobby in the United States that was starting to be called out. He said it on Megyn Kelly's show. So months ago. I was absolutely not a fan of his position on Israel. But that doesn't mean. And I didn't agree with almost everything else that he believed in. That's ridiculous anyway. So that's not a blanket. Like, 100% agree with everything Charlie said. Like no one does. I don't agree with everything that she says. You don't agree with everything that I say in life. Right.
- [58:35]
A
That is truth. That's 100% fact checked. True.
- [58:38]
B
That's 100% true. All right, we've got more news to get to because I don't know if you saw what Congressman Tim Burchett just said the other day he laid out in explicit detail. I mean, this isn't just some random dude. He's a member of Congress who says that there are multiple underground bases he believes underwater, where anomalous aircraft, UFOs, USOs, UAPs, whatever you want to call them coming out of large underground underwater bases, and members of the military are seeing them and he wants answers about this. And this came out, this was. Obviously we didn't get to really talk about it last week because everything that happened with Charlie Kirk, but the UFO hearing on Capitol Hill definitely shed some light on some big things. We're going to talk about that right after this.
- [59:21]
A
But first we wanna tell you about our friends over at Chapter because millions of seniors are on the wrong Medicare plan. You know why? Because there are companies out there that will steer seniors towards plans that will give them kickbacks. They don't do the real research, they don't advocate for their clients. And in fact, that leaves most seniors on the wrong plan, the wrong expensive plan that is not helping them to monitor their health. That's why we've partnered with, with Chapter because they are the exact opposite of that. Chapter doesn't work for the government or big insurance, they work for you. They're the only advisors that compare every Medicare plan nationwide to find out what is best for you. And they'll even help you if you're hit with wrongful medical bills. That's real advocacy. Advocacy. They've saved the average senior $1,100 per year. And in fact, one of our good friends used CHAPTER and is now saving thousands going forward. And the best part is that this is a free service for our audience. If you have 20 minutes, do this research, see if chapter is the right advocate for you. They can review your options in under 20 minutes. So give them a call at 202-655-5811 to connect with the only Medicare advisors we trust here at redacted. Most people in our audience say they wish they'd called sooner. You'll be glad you did. Again, call the number or go to askchapter.org redacted one more time, ask chapter.org.
- [60:44]
B
Redacted all right, well, let's talk. I love someone in the chat rooms like, oh, you're going to talk about UFOs, then I'm out of here. Your weirdo UFO stuff. Okay. I don't know if you know, there was a congressional hearing on it last week and multiple whistleblowers and high level members of the military have told their stories to redacted. So you can have whatever feelings you want about it. But it's true. Friend of the show, Congressman Tim Burchett dropped a bombshell this week when he openly talked about advanced civilizations coming from the bottom of at least five to six underwater locations that he's aware of alien craft or some sort of advanced craft Using, I don't know, you know, electromagnetism, etc. Or anti gravity propulsion that are able to come from deep inside our oceans. We here at Redacted have also talked to US military whistleblowers who confirm this to us. Dr. Michael Sala has been on this story for years. He writes@exopolitics.org and by the way, he's got incredible sources on this, those who have been involved in these underwater base programs as well. Doctor, great to see you. Welcome back to the show.
- [61:59]
G
Thanks, Clayton.
- [62:01]
B
So let's, I want to play Congressman Burchett's soundbite here so we can hear the congressman in his own words. This isn't some random kook. He's a member of Congress. Watch. What if these are entities that are here on this earth, that have been on this earth who knows how long, and that we, you know, we think they're coming in from way out, maybe they did millennia ago, but they're here and they're in these deep water areas. And that's why, I mean, like we say, we know more about the face of the moon than we do what's going on there. We have a higher propensity of sightings around these five or six, I believe, deep area, deep water areas. And so to me, it just creates a question there. And then when we have naval personnel telling me that we have these sightings and that these, there's these underwater craft they're chasing that are doing hundreds of miles an hour and the best we've got is something that does maybe just.
- [63:08]
F
A little under 40 miles an hour.
- [63:10]
B
So I, I got a lot of questions about that stuff and I, I mean, I have a lot of questions about that too. Dr. Saleh, what did you make of his comments there? Does this pair up with things that you've reported over the years and written about?
- [63:28]
G
Definitely, yes. And it's good to emphasize that Congressman Burchett, I mean, he's been talking to a lot of very senior whistleblowers, people from the military, from senior ranks of the executive branch, or from any source that has some information about the UFO issue that they have been reporting to Congress through whistleblowers. And this is an official process. And you mentioned the UFO hearing last week on September 9th. So we actually have whistleblowers appearing before Congress talking about their experiences. Now what we have here from Tim Burchett is something pretty remarkable that he's been told things about these underwater civilizations. That is probably one of the most highly kept secrets in terms of what the U.S. navy is doing in the Atlantic Ocean. Now the U.S. navy does have an Area 51 in the ocean. It's called Ortech, which is the Atlantic Undersea Testing and Evaluation Center. It's on Andros island, which is actually part of the Bahamas. So think about that. That you actually have this submarine base, this top secret submarine base, Andros island, which is not even part of the United States. And right there in that diagram you can see Andros island with Ortek. And just to the right of it is Tongue of the Ocean, which is a very deep part of the ocean there in the, in the Bahamas. That drops off immediately around 3,000ft. And so that's ideal for a submarine, but it's also a place where people have seen many UFOs, many underwater craft coming into and leaving the water. So there've been a lot of UFO sightings in that area. And I've actually got two witnesses who actually have been to locations under the water near that location, near the ortec.
- [65:46]
B
So hold on a second. So you have two witnesses that have been working on these, I guess you could call them secret space program programs, even though they're under the water by all accounts that have been to these underwater bases basically in the Bermuda Triangle area, is that right?
- [66:04]
G
That's right, yes. Two independent whistleblowers, people who have been participants in secret space programs that have talked about their experiences. And these were experiences that were like over 40 years apart. So the one that I first began to discuss was with this army insider who still goes by the pseudonymous JP that was just the initials of his name. And at the time he was serving with the U.S. army. And he was called on a mission where he went to a ocean platform. He was taken there by a Black Hawk helicopter with three other personnel. One was a diplomat. And then they boarded a submarine that was crewed by these. They were kind of like Nordic looking beings. They were very, very tall, like 6 foot 9, 6, 10. And he says that they went down in this submarine. It wasn't a U.S. navy submarine. It was something that had really advanced technologies inside it. The ceilings were very, very high, like 10 foot. So clearly not a US submarine. And he said it was very likely able to go out into space as well. So it was capable of both going into the ocean at high SPE speeds and also flying into the atmosphere and out into space. But he says he went in that submarine and he was taken down with the other personnel and it was part of a diplomatic mission and they were taken down to this underwater City that was under a dome. And he said that in this dome, this giant dome, he said it was a city that looked like Dubai. It was a very big city like Dubai. And in the middle of it was this massive white pyramid. And he says that he and two of the other guys that were there part of the mission had to wait while the diplomat went and made contact and then came back with an artifact and that their mission was to bring that artifact back to the surface. So that was jp and that's been described in that, that was first described in August 2022 article I wrote on my website. And then not long after that I came across the second testimony of an independent witness. And he actually drew an underwater city in that area in 1979. He was taken there as a 10 year old and he was there and he saw, I was going to say.
- [68:48]
B
This looks like the drawing of a 10 year old old. And it. So he was 10 years old when he drew this. He was taken there at 10 years old?
- [68:56]
G
Exactly. Yes, he was taken there at 10. He was also part of a secret space program. They often identify these talented youngsters and he was one of them that had special skills. He was a contactee. And so he was part of a secret space program, but he was taken there at 10. And that is evidence, what you showed, showed there, you know, that's a drawing from a 10 year old in 1979. So that's over 40 years old. So you can carbon test it and determine that this was written by a 10 year old. And he describes three underwater domes and that there were cities or there were structures inside. And so that's very, very close. That's corroboration for what JP described. Now and they both have described the location of this in the Bahamas in the Bermuda Triangle. And so that has gotten me to kind of like speculate that it is very close likely to Autek, which is the Navy's Area 51.
- [70:04]
B
Now to be clear on that drawing, because people in the chat room are like, well what 10 year old dates their drawing? I don't think that 10 year old dated the drawing, right? I think it's.
- [70:14]
G
Oh yes, yes, he dated it.
- [70:15]
B
Oh, he did. He wrote his. He wrote the date on it?
- [70:18]
G
Yes, he wrote it. I think it's 151 79. Oh yeah, 15, 179, which is. He's French. So that's 15th of January 1979. And this is. And this. And his parents saw this. I mean he told his parents that he had been taken there. So his parents are witnesses. And he says he came back from that experience in the Bahamas with sand. And so his parents saw the sand and said, where have you been? He said, the Bahamas. And they were living in a. French. In Paris at the time. And so they. They were, but they was. They were very supportive of him and didn't dismiss him. And. And they are now witnesses that, yes, he did draw this in 1979. That, yes, he came back from what he said was an experience in the Bahamas in 1979, and he saw these three underwater domes where there were these structures within them exactly matching what JP says he saw over 40 years later.
- [71:22]
B
So when you mentioned Area 51, and basically this is like an, I guess an underground version of. Of that we've also heard from U.S. admirals. These aren't just like schleps off the street. I mean, US Admirals have now gone on the record about interacting with these craft that they're seeing coming out of the water. Is there like one or two specific cases that you might tell us about that? So I think we had a US Admiral only just a few months ago confirming this.
- [71:50]
G
Right, Tim Gulliver there. Yes. Well, there's a famous incident in lake. From Lake Baikal in. In Russia where there were a team of Russian divers that were training and they saw several luminous beings that were like 10 foot tall, kind of like rising up out of the depth of the ocean. And so they were told to go and. And capture one of these beings. So they went back into the water with the mission of capturing one of the beings. And when they tried to capture one of the beings, then a weapon hit them and it kind of like took them, sent them immediately to the surface. And unfortunately, they died from the bends because, you know, that was quite a depth that they were operating from. But yes, so that was one example of these intelligent beings that was cited by Russian special forces.
- [72:55]
B
And do we have documentation of them having died of the bends? Like, has that been.
- [73:00]
G
Confirmed? Yes, that was an incident that was reported by Russian UFO researchers that this is part of the Overall phenomenon of UFOs cited in the Soviet Union. And that, yes, there are many cases that have emerged because unlike the United States, when the Soviet Union collapsed, a lot of these files concerning UFOs that had been kept secret were suddenly released. And that was because a lot of former intelligence agents from the Soviet Union era, you know, from the Warsaw Pact. So you could imagine Polish intelligence officers, all of a sudden, they have all of this material and it's like, well, we're not part of the Warsaw Pact anymore. And so let's. Let's sell them and make some money. And that's what. And that's what happened. So a lot of this material came out, and there was a special by Roger Moore, Secrets from the Iron Curtain. I believe it came out in the 1990s where a lot of this kind of material came out.
- [74:11]
B
Before I let you go, Doc, I mean, you look at last week, and you look at this UFO hearing. It happened on September 9th. We were set to have a couple of people from. I think we were supposed to have Congressman Burchett on the show. We were supposed to have James Fox on the show the next day. And of course, we canceled all of it in the wake of what happened with Charlie Kirk on September 10th. But there was a lot of news that came out of there. I mean, maybe you can give us maybe some of your biggest takeaways from this UAP hearing last week.
- [74:42]
G
Well, there were several new whistleblowers that talked about sightings that they experienced while serving in the military. And there were some videos released. And the most spectacular one showed an orb that was actually hit by a missile.
- [75:00]
B
And.
- [75:01]
G
And the missile passed through it, and the orb separated into four bits. And so this is captured on film, and you see this kind of orb that moves. Moves off. Now it's. It's broken up into four bits. And. And of course, people can look at that and say, well, you know what. What kind of UFO survives a hit from a missile that. That was kind of like only a short distance away, so it made a direct impact. And. And this kind of splitting of a UFO into multiple pieces, this. This often happens with UFO sightings that people see these UFOs, they. They split, and then they join up a little later. So it kind of shows that what you're dealing with is some kind of plasma consciousness of the craft and that knows how to separate and how to rejoin. So that's a kind of a very unique aspect of these UFOs. Another kind of, like, critical thing that I think emerged from the September 9 hearing is that a lot of these whistleblowers are being intimidated, that they are being threatened, and that they have been efforts to kind of close them down. And so, you know, this is where there's a real need for whistleblower protection and that these congressional hearings serve an important function in, like, giving these whistleblowers an opportunity to share their stories and to be kind of, like, protected by coming out into the public arena. Because if there's one thing that is very dangerous for whistleblowers is if they reveal what they have experienced and they don't have much of a public profile, they can be very easily eliminated. And that has happened.
- [77:01]
B
That's right. They have been eliminated. There's been plenty of reports of that happening and these people are silenced or they're driven off the road and it's absolutely terrible. Dr. Michael Sala, thank you so much for joining us once again. I appreciate it. Where can people learn more about all of your writings by the way?
- [77:17]
G
They can just go to exopolitics.org or my podcast which is exopolitics today.com.
- [77:25]
B
All right. Dr. Michael Sala, great to have you here as well. By the way, can I just ask you, how do you deal with like the ridicule? Because you know, you get the, I mean I love covering this stuff because I think absolutely we're not alone in the universe and I think the government is lying to us about what, what these relationships are with these off world vehicles and what crash retrieval programs we have inside the United States government. What do we know? And you just keep on going. And I love that there'll be people that are like, this is foolish, this is crazy. How do you keep going?
- [77:56]
G
Well, I've been doing this for 24 years now and people said I was crazy back when I had a full time position at university that I would focus on this stuff. And of course I didn't care because to me it was the future. I mean this is reality. I mean if I didn't think that this was real, I wouldn't be doing this for so long and had suffered all of the kind of career consequences. But I knew it was real then, I know it's real now and so I'll just keep doing this. And I'm very grateful that your show has been given these issues a lot of exposure. But I'm very glad that the US Congress has finally stepped forward and is now doing these hearings because you know, once the US Congress gets involved, this is very, very serious. And the members of Congress, Tim Burchett and Paulina Luna and the others, Nancy Mace, you know, they're doing a really good job in showing that this is not a laughing matter. This is not nothing to be ridiculed about. This is dealing with important secrets that are being denied to the US Congress. And it deals with kind of life saving technologies, right?
- [79:11]
B
I mean zero point energy free energy, the ability to travel instantaneously. And they've kept this information from us, they've kept this technology from Us. You know, hopefully the chickens are coming home to roost now. Dr. Sala, great to see you. Thank you so much.
- [79:26]
G
Thank you.
- [79:28]
B
All right. What do you guys think about that? Philip, you were saying? I hadn't heard about the. We were talking earlier about USOs. USOs? Underwater submersible objects. And, you know, when you have. Think about the massive amounts of bodies of water on the Earth, far more than land, and you have these members of the military, you have, you know, you have members of the United States Navy, you have admirals in the United States Navy who have come forward and admitted that they did. This was not their craft. This was not an enemy craft. They didn't know what came up from underneath their ship, flew right up into the sky, hovered there, and then shot off at speeds that they've never seen before. So, anyway. Thoughts? Thoughts? Prayers? Any ideas?
- [80:12]
E
Yeah, it was funny because I'd never heard the. Because I follow this stuff. Probably not, like, at the depth of viewer or Dr. Sala, but. And I've never heard the term USO, so that was the. I thought it was a typo when you sent that to me.
- [80:26]
B
Yeah, I was.
- [80:27]
H
I was thinking, did we just dox Aquaman as his condo, like his mansion under the sea?
- [80:34]
B
Well, and these, like, five locations or six locations that are massive in size that are, you know, how deeply they go, they sit off of Bermuda and other spots around the world. Like, where are these located? Actually. Actually. So, you know, hopefully we can get some answers on that, because it's much easier to go and try to figure out and get answers on here on Earth than to try to go out somewhere deep in space. Take your super chats.
- [81:00]
H
We should be careful talking about this because then they're going to start the US Aquaforce. Next we'll have Space Force and Aquaforce.
- [81:06]
B
Space Force. Now we're going to the moon. We're going to the moon base. We're going to Mars. Probably go to Europa next. And then. Yeah, then we'll build an underwater. Underwater submersible division. Although I guess the Navy would sort of already fall into that. But. Yeah, no, they'd have to build a whole new military. Yeah. Hey, have you guys heard of bearskin hoodie? I'm sure you have. You see me wearing it right now. I love this thing. And so many of my friends have bought them. They absolutely love them. These things are like a tank. People are buying their winter gear right now, and you're gonna get an unbelievable discount if you just pay attention to what I'm about to tell you here, you'll get 60% off. These things are fantastic. Everyone in my family now has one and they love them. My son loves it. And you have these removable patches you can get right on their website too. You want to put a flag there, which I have also put the don't tread on me patch right here on the side. Bearskin makes incredible stuff. They're running a 60% off deal right now, but only if you get your hoodie early. This hoodie is built like a tank. 340 micro. 340 GSM micro fleece. 10 pockets. Clean, rugged fit that looks awesome. It's brilliantly sturdy. This hoodie is built really strong. Plus it zips right into heavy storm rain jacket as well. So you can slide it right inside if you want to put that shell over top of it. If it's going to be a rainy day. So it doesn't matter if it's cold, wet, windy, you're not scrambling last minute. If you got your bare skin hoodie right now, you'll get a free US Shipping fast delivery and you'll lock in your winter gear early. That's right. It's a win win. So do yourself a favor. Text the word. All you need to do is grab your phone and text the word redacted to 36912 and that'll unlock your 60% off right there. Again, text the word redacted to 36912 and you'll get a link which will be sent straight to your phone. You can check it out later if you're busy right now. Don't try to do this if you're driving or something else, but try it later. When you're home on the couch. Don't wait until you're freezing to realize that your hoodie sucks. Grab a bear skin right now. It's 60% off. Text the word redacted to 369 12. Our thanks to Bearskin. Absolutely love these guys. And I love their stuff. And I love their T shirts, by the way. I wear them all the damn time. So I know I'm talking about their hoodies, but I wear their. I wear their hoodie. I wear their T shirts all the time. All right, let's take a few of your super chats. Donation says evolve20212 says. I am so effing sick of folks calling Tile Tyler an assassin. He's not John Wick. He's a dorky, dorky kid with an old rifle. That's all.
- [83:56]
E
So just to clarify, murder is when you kill Somebody. But when you kill somebody for political motivation, that is the by definition assassination. That's what an assassination is. It is the murder of somebody for political reasons. Yeah, it's not, it's not the murder of a political figure necessarily. It is that your reasons were political that makes it assassination.
- [84:15]
B
Right. So right from the gate, right from the get go, we were calling him an assassin or calling whomever is responsible, you know, he might be the, the patsy, we don't know. But whoever assassinated Charlie Kirk assassinated him. This wasn't just a random, you know, crime at a, at a bodega. Someone stealing some money from a, you know, from a store owner or something like that. When NPCs attacks redacted needs to evolve. Like me, the angry NPC. Gary Dickinson says the IDF Tommy Robinson t shirt that redacted endorsed. No, we didn't endorse an IDF T shirt. But thank you for that. Justin Shades says Charlie wasn't a politician. No, it doesn't matter. Neither was Martin Luther King. Martin Luther King was assassinated. He wasn't a politician. He was a reverend and a speaker. And Charlie was a political organizer and a speaker. Clayton Valkyrie says. Clayton to just start twisting this story. Why don't say there is not any other shooter. I'm not, I'm not saying there's no other shooter. I didn't say that at all. Are you saying that I said that there's not.
- [85:37]
H
We can't say that. I mean we don't know like we're just asking questions like we've not made any definitive claim of anything because we're just going through footage just like everybody else and asking questions.
- [85:48]
B
Yeah. Mr. Mike says I appreciate redacted asking all these questions again, that's the only way you get answers. I want to know why the FBI released a video and didn't give us the full video and they did it on purpose. And in the video they released at the bottom of their video, they say that this man, he shot Charlie Kirk. But before we even knew if that's. Well, then why don't you show us in the video that he did that confirmed. Why don't you confirm that, please?
- [86:14]
H
I'm waiting for them to say, oh, those cameras were offline that day, unfortunately.
- [86:18]
B
Right. Yeah. They had high definition cameras that were installed I think in like 2022 over the series of recently within just like the past few years. High def cameras all over that university. Hundreds.
- [86:33]
H
The two guards that were in charge of watching the roof were sleeping and reading magazines or something like.
- [86:37]
B
Right. Gary Dixon Says Israel. The Israel lobby is funding Tommy Robinson's legal costs. Respond, please. Okay, like, if you think I support Israel, okay. Because we had Tommy Robinson on to talk about the massive hundreds of thousands of people protest in the UK over the past week. Don't, please don't, please don't do that. I don't know how, how more vocal we could be on this show about the genocide that's happening in Gaza. We've done maybe a segment every two days on this show for the past year and a half or past two years. I was literally in Egypt on October 7th and reported that very day that on that day I reported that Israel was lying and stood down. So don't you dare come to me and say that we don't have balls and would cover the real story just because we had Tommy Robinson on. You know, we don't take any funding from the idf. We don't take any funding from Israel.
- [88:04]
H
Yeah, it's like, why do people, you know, it's like if you have a guest on and it's something that's like, are you just wanting your biases confirmed? Like, is that the only thing you want to see? Like, in order to get to real answers, you bring on opposing views, similar views, you know, like, that's the only way you, you get information. It's like, it doesn't mean that everybody that comes on a show, like, look at Tucker Carlson. He doesn't support the views of everybody he talks to, but he's willing to have conversations.
- [88:32]
B
Yeah, I cover stories. I could have pushed back on the anti Muslim rhetoric coming out of Tommy, Tommy's mouth, Tommy Locksley's mouth. We did a whole segment where we pushed back on Tommy Robinson's anti Muslim talk. Someone who went, went right after Tommy specifically on that. So we did a whole segment separately of that. And then, by the way, we said we'd love to invite Tommy on the show to clarify his position. And so he came on the show and clarified his position. But that doesn't discount the violence that's happened across the UK and from these illegal immigrants and girls being raped and attacked in parks. Matt W. Says if Charlie's security was infiltrated, let's get the details of that investigation. Hold the mole responsible. Yeah, again, I would love to know. Well, I want answers about that individual behind Charlie and that camera that was there. And what? David, maybe we can put up those photos and you can tell me. Maybe I can go grab the PTZ camera here. Maybe you can show that. I'm going to hop up For a second, I want to just show. Because maybe that's similar to what's known as a PTZ camera.
- [89:51]
E
No, it was a.
- [89:51]
H
It was a. It. Show the. Show the image, Philip. So I can see it. So I watched it on Candace Owens.
- [89:59]
E
Hang on.
- [90:00]
G
It's.
- [90:00]
E
Hang on, let me. I'm searching for it. I didn't have that light queued up.
- [90:04]
B
There we go. Yeah. So he's putting something in the bag. Like this camera that's behind. It was behind Charlie. It's on some sort of a mount. You can see it's on like an articulated arm mount that's connected there. Yeah.
- [90:20]
H
And then.
- [90:20]
B
So he took his camera down.
- [90:22]
H
Two lenses sitting there, too. You can see.
- [90:26]
B
So there's another photo. We have a photo of. I think there's a photo in that mix, isn't there, Philip? Of. Of the actual camera. It's like a still image from that batch.
- [90:36]
H
There's. There's a still image of him actually taking the camera down that I saw on Candace's show yesterday.
- [90:40]
B
Yeah. Yeah, we have that same image. Yeah, I was trying to.
- [90:43]
E
I don't. I'm not seeing that image anywhere.
- [90:45]
B
Okay. It's in craft. I know. I threw three of them in there. That one. Oh, yeah.
- [90:50]
E
Okay. I know which one.
- [90:51]
B
Yes.
- [90:52]
E
This one.
- [90:52]
B
I got it.
- [90:53]
E
I didn't recognize it.
- [90:55]
B
So. Yeah, I don't know if there's a way we can. Is there a way we can zoom in on that or can I do that on my laptop? Hold on, hold on. So I'm just curious. So we take a look at that camera that he's. So this is like almost immediately after. And by the way, this is a crime scene. So there's all these people there just like, you know, manipulating this crime scene. What was the chain of evidence. What was the chain of custody for the evidence? Like the gun cameras.
- [91:26]
H
So that's. That's a camera with a lens on it. Not. Not like a ptz. That's a.
- [91:32]
B
Okay, so it is a. So I guess my question was because some people are saying that that camera is fixed on the person asking the question. So it might not have been actually on Charlie. But what kind of lens is that? It looks like it's kind of a tighter lens. So it might not have been a wide shot, wide angle, single lens, right?
- [91:52]
H
Yeah. Because if. If he's. If he's using that to. To get the person that's asking questions, it's going to be, you know, like a. Probably a 70 to, you know, 70 to 80 millimeter maybe from there. So it's a pretty tight shot of the person asking the questions. So it probably wouldn't have what we're looking for in the background.
- [92:14]
B
Yeah. Now Candace says she knows that guy. Right. I mean, that's the thing.
- [92:17]
H
But she said she. When she was a turning point.
- [92:20]
B
Yeah. So I know there's people saying that this guy didn't even work for turning points. That's not true. Like, that's how conspiracies roll. But anyway, this is a PTZ camera. So at first I thought, oh, maybe this was a PTZ camera there that you can mount and then you can actually remotely control it and you can like zoom in. Like, I know when I was on Tucker's. Tucker's show a few, you know, weeks ago, that's what his team uses in their studio. So when you're sitting on an interview.
- [92:48]
H
Like with really good, like Canon ones that have, you know, really nice lenses, like more like ten, twelve thousand dollar cameras, but they don't have interchangeable lenses. Like it looks like is on that. It looks like there's a zoom lens on that camera.
- [93:05]
B
Ryan, UFC says this is a conspiracy channel now. Ryan, where have you been? We've been busting conspiracies for years on this show. This is a conspiracy.
- [93:16]
E
The show is freaking redacted.
- [93:17]
B
I mean, yeah, show is redacted. Almost every story we've done on this show, six months later, it starts out as a conspiracy theory. Six months later, it's confirmed. You want to go back through our archives when we've been banned talking about COVID Pfizer, Moderna. Go back, go back, Go back as much as you want. Oh, my God. Yeah.
- [93:41]
H
How many of those stories have we retracted? Let me see, let me count. How many?
- [93:45]
B
Zero. Zero. Oh, let me just run down a laundry list. When you talk about COVID we can talk about lab leak theory, we can talk about Dr. Fauci, we can talk about Fort Detrick, we can talk about massive sex trafficking operation that was happening in the United States that we. That we were one of the first news stations to. To break that story on here on live with whistleblowers from HHS and otherwise confirmed. Confirmed in front of Congress. We were called conspiracy nuts. We were called hateful. YouTube blocked us. What about, what about the lies that were being told about some of the, the, the war crimes happening in Ukraine that we debunked and that we were also banned? YouTube actually took our videos down as a result of that. Then it's, it's. It was subsequently confirmed we showed Zelinsky standing in front of a green screen with his little production studio. Like, we. We've uncovered a lot of things on this show over the years.
- [94:47]
H
Yeah. And it's funny. Like, we. We got taken down for going against YouTube's guidelines and then. And lost revenue for the time we were down. Can't get our million play button. And then YouTube changes their guidelines to be what. Exactly what we were saying, and we get no. No relief from YouTube.
- [95:04]
B
Nothing. Yeah, it's crazy. So what happens is when you, when you hit a million subscribers on your channel, YouTube will send you a golden play button. We have a, you know, we have. We have a silver one or whatever floating around here somewhere, but they'll send you one when you hit a million subscribers. Right? So when we hit a million subscribers, because we had multiple violations from YouTube because they censored us, one of which, or two of which were related to Covid, was a violation of their terms of service, exactly how it was said in their. In their documents. Then YouTube changed their own terms of service so that what we said was 100% accurate. And if you said the opposite of that, you would then be in violation. But because we had violated their pre Covid terms of bs, we said, hey, when are you guys gonna sell us send us that golden play button. And they said, oh, because you violated. Because you. You had a community guidelines violation for your stance on Covid, we can't send you that golden play button. I'm like, but you now changed. You changed your terms of service, and what we said then was 100% accurate. So needless to say, we're almost at 3 million subscribers and we still have no golden play button on redacted. That's fine. Whatever. Whatever.
- [96:28]
H
Yeah, and they also tell you they're human reviewed. And we, and we did some. We submitted them for review and we're talking, you know, hour and a half long live stream, and literally within like three minutes, it said it was human reviewed and was still found to be.
- [96:43]
E
Yeah, that was. That one was. That one was a. Was a. It was a 24 minute long video. And I think the Clayton. We were all sitting there when Clayton wrote it out because it was after the show. We was all kind of hanging out. Clayton wrote the thing and it was like maybe eight minutes later. And they're like, yeah, under. Under human review. And I was like, they didn't even watch it in double time. Because that would have been, you know.
- [97:03]
B
It'S like, the 16 is crazy. There's no way they didn't watch it. This is happening across the board. People, like, submit things and they. Their AI, they just review it. They don't even care anymore. They just have an agenda, you know? Dr. Joanne Krause, PhD, says, been redacted. Been with you guys since day one. Thank you so much. Dr. Johanna Kraus, PhD Claudio says, yeah, I found this channel during COVID Priceless. Thank you for that. I mean, I'm not gonna lie to you. Like, every day that we did that show during COVID it was like, hey, is our channel gonna be here tomorrow? Every day. And then we thought, we're out of the clear on that. And then it was the war in Ukraine. Like, we were, you know, we were exposing the lies that were being told about the war In Ukraine, the CIA's war in Ukraine, and they were coming after us for that.
- [97:57]
H
So, yeah, I mean, when we were. When we were reading Pfizer's own documents, we didn't think in a million years we would get suspended for that, but we did. And then after that, we were like, before the show, we were always having discussions in our. Our private chat, like, okay, how can we say this? You know, like. Like, they made us have to question everything we wanted to talk about just because we didn't want to get suspended again. Because if you get suspended three times within I believe it's 90 days, you lose your channel. Like, they completely shut it down.
- [98:28]
B
Yeah, Well, I have two people here. Retribution. Zenith Point says YouTube deleted my 480,000 sub channel with no strikes, for literally no reason. They never responded, and they deleted all of the data. Thanks for that, YouTube. So cool of you. Unbelievable. Kleenex64 says, I had five YouTube channels taken for just talking about COVID I think, honestly, the only thing that let us survive the COVID era and when we were telling the truth about it and we were reading Pfizer's own documents on the air, and they blocked us for two weeks for it. The only reason we survived, I think, is because we had a very large subscriber base. But I heard from a lot of people that had, you know, 50,000 subs, 100,000 subs, even less than, you know, whatever, that were just being wiped out, unfortunately, because. And then they didn't have as big a voice to complain about it, so they knew they could just take out some of these smaller channels and they'd have no recourse whatsoever.
- [99:31]
H
Well, in the end. And once that happens, like, there was a. There was a guy that we had on as a guest several times. I Think his name was Mike. He was a Russian journalist.
- [99:39]
B
Yeah.
- [99:40]
H
And we weren't even allowed to have him on our channel because then we could get a strike for having him on. So once they silence you, they can't even go on other channels to have the same conversation.
- [99:52]
B
No. Nick Fuentes says that. He said, they'll probably take your channel down if I come on and do an interview. So, you know, that's the thing. Unless, I guess, unless you go on one of the bigger channels, you have a couple million subscribers or something like that, you know, I don't know. But who. Who the hell knows? Allison Langbine says, I love redacted. My husband now believes me. Thank you. Awesome. All right. Benji says, yeah, they would continue to stream on Rumble as they do now. Well, there was an era where we had. We had to say, hey, you know, go on over to Rumble to watch this next segment with this interview with this doctor. There was an era when we would have, like, Dr. Peter McCullough on the show, and there's no way that we could have him on YouTube. Like, we would have to then say goodbye to our YouTube audience and go over to Rumble, just Peter, Corey, like.
- [100:46]
H
We couldn't have any of this business.
- [100:47]
E
We also, we also had to do it in kind of a roundabout way because YouTube disallowed you from directing to something that they considered not okay for YouTube. So we couldn't say. We couldn't actually put like a, hey, come over to Rumble and watch us on our Rumble stream while we talk about this thing. Because we can't say on YouTube. We had to be like, hey, we're live somewhere else. Go find us there. And, you know, it was like, go.
- [101:11]
B
Seek us out somewhere else. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Like, this is the tyranny. Feel like things have changed, though. Hopefully. I don't know. I mean, but there's been channels, I think Diana, was it Porochenko. She's a Ukrainian journalist that just had her channel destroyed, wiped away. She's an anti war, pro peace Ukrainian journalist hated by Zelinsky, you know, and.
- [101:34]
H
On a TV network in Ukraine, like.
- [101:38]
B
Yeah, crazy. Oh, hey. So I asked. I asked Grim, who's our graphic designer here at Redacted? I said, I've been really wanting to do this for a while. And he said, I have, too. And I said, I want to create some new merch for the redacted store that has the Don't Tread on Me snake throwback, of course, to the Revolutionary War in the United States. And Grim made this incredible New design. Look at that. If you go to the redacted store.com, it's up and live. It just went live this morning. And by the way, it was hilarious because Grim and I were on the store looking at it, going back and forth, talking about it, and I said, I want to order two of them right now. Like use my credit card. And I said, hey, just. Or, you know, I want to order me one of the hoodies right now. Order me a long sleeve shirt right now. I want it right now. Get me a large and send it to me. And he's like, somebody already ordered them. Like he had just flipped them live. And one of our viewers, one of you guys had already gone in there and ordered some of them. So you guys beat us to it, which is awesome. Anyway, if you go to redacted store.com, you can see the new merch. The Don't Tread on Me hoodie is now live. I love it. I love it. I really, I'm so excited about this. It's a throwback to the Revolutionary War, of course, the famous Don't Tread on Me flag. And to be fair, I was inspired by our friends over at Bearskin. I will say that because they have those little patches you can order that go on the side of their hoodies. Where is it? On this side? Yeah, right here. I said, you know what? I want a full shirt like that. I want to say, enough is enough. And in the wake of everything that happened with Charlie Kirk, I'm like, I am. I'm just angry. I'm just kind of furious. I'm fed up, you know, I don't want to back down to these people anymore. I'm through with it. I'm sick of it. So Don't Tread on me. The redacted store.com. we get t shirts, the long T shirts and the short T shirts, as well as the new hoodie and the new mugs are there as well. Don't Tread on Me mug. So perfect for the holidays. Pick one up for a loved one in your family. I love these things.
- [103:44]
H
Was it Albert Finney that did that scene in the network? Was he in the network that. I'm mad as hell.
- [103:50]
B
I'm mad as hell. I want you to get up from your seats, go to the window, and I want you to yell, I'm mad as hell. And I'm not going to take it anymore. And you know, that's one of the greatest movies of all time. One of the best written movies of all time is network. The great screenwriter Patty Chavesky wrote that back in the day.
- [104:11]
H
Was that Albert Finney that was in that?
- [104:13]
B
It was Albert Finney. Was he the one that played. I'm mad as hell. I know Albert Finney is in the movie.
- [104:21]
H
Yeah, I can't remember.
- [104:22]
B
I think you're right. There's a bunch of great actors in that movie. Of course. Faye Dunaway, right? Faye Dunaway is in that. Who else? Anyway, yeah, I'm mad as hell and I can't. I'm not going to take it anymore. Get up. Go to the rooftops. Peter Finch. Thank you, Grim. Peter Finch.
- [104:40]
G
Finch.
- [104:40]
B
Okay. Yeah. Albert Finney. Who else? No, who was the boss? I think he just passed away recently, actually. The boss. Like, he's across.
- [104:52]
E
I'm just looking at the cast. I'm just looking at the cast here. It's Faye Dunaway, William Holden, Peter Finch, Robert Duvall, Wesley Addy, Ned Beatty, Bill Burroughs.
- [105:02]
B
Yeah, yeah. Robert Duvall is the boss across the. I think Robert Duvall's the boss right across the room. Like you only get these like shots of him, like from a distance or something. I don't know. Steven Erickson says the answer is from the channel called Israeli News Live. Thank you for that. Updates on Germany. Rhys Feeney says updates on Germany. Do you have an update on Germany? Reese Fenik wants to know what about Germany? That it's collapsing and they're now militarizing a hundred thousand new people because they want to go to war with Russia. Chakabaya says Kirk was shot from behind on his right side. So let's have a discussion about that real quick and then we'll get you guys out of here on this Thursday. But there are ballistics experts who believe that he was shot on the right side through the lower part of his ear, through the skull, hit the spine, and then exited out. Others believe, and it's been now confirmed by multiple sources that he in fact was wearing soft body armor. From the surgeon who worked on his body. From the surgeon who worked on him at the hospital. Confirmed. I think Megyn Kelly also confirmed it. I confirmed it separately with sources who knew the type of armor he used to wear, but also through secondhand sources that confirmed it at the hospital. So. But a hand of the heavens, I mean, I wish we could say 100%, like, 100%. He was wearing soft body armor, like a level two soft body armor. Because as friend of the show Kyle Serafin pointed out, almost all types of hits that you would protect yourself from occur with handguns, close range handguns. So if he was wearing that soft body armor, like from tire. Are we able to pull up my laptop or. No, Philip, I don't think so. Right.
- [107:09]
H
No, we can't.
- [107:11]
E
No, we can't.
- [107:13]
B
Are you able to drop in a picture, David, from tire tactical?
- [107:18]
E
I can if you put it in craft. I'll put it in.
- [107:21]
B
Okay. Just see if I can do this here.
- [107:24]
H
Did you see the reports from. I can't remember if it was Candace that said this, but that his chest was caved in as well, right?
- [107:32]
B
Well, again, that's what we had. That's what we had reported on almost immediately with the soft body armor premise, that he was shot in the chest, that you would aim for the chest, you would aim for the heart, that it punctured the soft body armor, hit the back of his spine, and then it goes and does all sorts of crazy things inside the body, of course. And once it hits that soft body armor, it becomes almost like a deflated bullet. Not, you know, and then it just ravages right through the body and up and then out of his neck. But again, we're waiting for the medical examiner's report. You think we'd have that by now? See if I can find this. But anyway, if you go to tiretactical.com you can see the type of soft body armor that he used to wear that he would wear. It kind of looks like. I don't know, for the lack of a better phrase, like a tank top or a white. You know what I'm talking about, like a white sort of tank top style that would fit underneath there, and it's really tight to the body, and you can't really. Can't even tell at all, but the way it's hit. And then his whole shirt lifts up. So there's that idea that he was shot straight in the chest. His shirt lifts up because the soft body armor, it goes right to his spine and then out his neck. The other idea is that he was shot from the side and it goes right through his right side of his head and hits his spine. And then it goes out the exit wound from his left side or from his right side? I don't know. I've seen all the videos. I watched all the analysis. Can we say definitively, I don't know? You know, again, if it's a 30 06, you know what a 3006 damage looks like as well. If you see it hit an object, you would see it blow out the other side massively. But of course, if it hits the chest, that's where the chest would cave in and go through the heart, go hit the spine and then out. And so you wouldn't see that massive exit wound because it hit his soft body armor, caved in his chest, and then went out that way. So I don't know. What do you guys think? Let me know in the chat room. What do you guys think now? Jacob Walters says, pitiful speculation. Where Dylan wants to know, where is the camera above Charlie?
- [110:03]
H
Yeah, no, there's HD footage of all of it somewhere. Because they had cameras on Charlie. They had a camera behind Charlie. But that was.
- [110:11]
B
Christopher says the soft body armor would not deflect the bullet. No, I didn't say that it would deflect the bullet at all. It said it deflated the bullet. So there were people initially saying that he was wearing like a tank armor plate, you know, like a level four type of plate. No, if he was wearing like a level two or even a level three, that would have stopped a handgun, but it would have helped to deflate or I should say deform the bullet that went through him. It would have helped to deform it in some capacity. It would not have been as perfectly pointy as it would have been if it struck. If it struck a soft body armor. And then that's how it could have, you know, added incredible amount of ravaging to the body up through the spine and out the side. So instead of it looking like a perfect bullet, it might have been deformed a little bit, changed its shape a little bit, flattened out a little bit. Enough to make it more damaging to the body. So, Christopher. No, I never said it.
- [111:15]
H
Rather than pierced.
- [111:17]
B
What's that?
- [111:18]
H
It would have ripped rather than pierced.
- [111:21]
B
Brutal Insights says the bullet is caught on frame. Literally. I know. I've watched the analysis by. I think it's Zebo. I think a friend of the show, Owen Schroyer, was referencing it yesterday on the show. Maybe. Maybe the frame caught that bullet. 30 frames a second, 60 frames a second. Maybe. Or maybe it was a bug. Again, dubious Maximus has redacted. There was a TV camera set up in the front left corner. We've not seen that in public domains. Huh. Front left corner. So looking down on Charlie from that angle, like front left of him, Other.
- [112:11]
H
Than a couple cell phone videos, we've not seen anything hd. We've not seen a single ounce of HD footage of anything, which is crazy.
- [112:19]
B
In an era of 4K HD that I literally have on my iPhone and the amount of footage that TPUSA would always film at these events, they filmed everything because they put out so much content. They would film interactions with guests. Charlie talking. I mean they have this footage. Gifty Sene says Redact is one of the top five YouTube channels for truth along with Tucker. Candace, thank you for your courage. Thank you Gifty. I appreciate that. David Jackson says a 7.62 millimeter bullet, 308 or 306 takes three out. Six takes about three and a half, three three quarters of a second to travel 300 meters. You can briefly see a.22 if you fire it into the sky. The trajectory of the bullet didn't look right. But I've seen many strange things. I know that's how I feel about it, right. I've seen many strange things. Brutal insight says redacted. Marine snipers detail it pretty well. It was a smaller round from behind him. Muzzle flash caught on frame. Bullet caught on frame. The infrared laser from the shooter is caught on camera. I've seen that as well. Again, side front was one apatsy told to run away. Easy to see him caught on multiple cameras. We got our guy while the shot rang out up close nearby, right nearby him. Again, I'd like the answers as all of you would. Lowest level says, wow, certain subject matter automatically brings professional trolls and bots. Yeah, I mean we definitely if, if we on our channel start talking about. Well it used to be like when we would start talking about Ukraine and we were exposing lies about that proxy war and the CIA because the CIA funded a large like bot army. And this is confirmed by the way. This isn't speculation. The CIA through funding of USAID into Ukraine basically set up like social media bot farms to go after and come after people. So if we were to do a title, our show that we're going to talk about the war in Ukraine and we started having guests on to talk about the war. Man, our, our entire chat room just be flooded with people like from like CIA trolls basically saying don't believe, you know, unsubscribe, unsubscribe. They would all copy and paste the same thing.
- [115:00]
H
But they don't operate in the US so that couldn't have happened.
- [115:03]
B
No, couldn't have happened at all. So anytime though, you really press a button though you can see it. You can see because they all like write the same thing. It's like a copy and paste thing. I don't know. Lucy Marion says Clayton, can you please find out why they paved the crime scene yesterday? Yeah, I'm talking, we're working on right now trying to try to get out to Utah. Actually. Actually, can you show that video? So this was where Philip, if you're able to pull that up, where they put the new blocks down, and then you can see that little trap door that's there, by the way. Yeah, here was the. This is where Charlie was sitting. So the university's already out there, has already wiped clean the entire crime scene and is building, doing construction work over the whole thing. Right in that square. Like we had a lawyer on earlier today. I think he labeled it spoilage or something like that of a crime scene. If he was defending, if he was the defense attorney, he would say, how the hell do you. Did you allow within, like no time at all for them to go in and spoil a crime scene? Like that sounds similar to like when they. They totally wiped down and spoiled the crime scene in Butler, Pennsylvania. Went to the guy's apartment and totally wiped it clean. That's pretty interesting. Joe Batter says. I listened to a former sniper talk about it last night. He said that shot from the roof at 200 yards is, in fact, not an easy shot. It's different when it's a human being you're targeting versus a deer. Yeah, I've heard from a number of people. So that shot is pretty easy. That that's a fairly common shot that you would. You would carry out 200 yards. It's like most like basic training level shot that you would carry out, especially in a prone position with a. With a target that's just sitting there. I mean, Charlie was moving a little bit, not much. And if you've got a scope and you're in a prone position down, you know, and you're facing down on this target that's just sitting there, not moving, it's a pretty easy shot. So, oh, maybe Governor Cox needs to be looked at, but the FBI couldn't do what this guest did. Willow Hill. Oh, are you rewatching the show, Willow? So, yeah, Arthur Cottrell says Redacted has been the victim of three level. Three level agency bot farms ever since their first show. I think you're right about that. I think within the first few days of our show, when we were covering the lies about COVID and. And all of that, we were being attacked. People calling us anti vaxxers or God knows what.
- [117:59]
H
That still happens if we talk about Israel.
- [118:04]
B
Retired army man says that sniper was just for clicks last night. I saw it. You know, I think that's why you need to weigh a lot of this stuff with a grain of salt. Like I was Watching one guy doing a video and he's like, all right, I'm going to tell you about this thing coming up. And he just like did all this, like, preamble. Oh, it's like, oh. But coming up, I'm going to do this. And then we've got this, we've got this Patreon thing. We're going to tell you about it and then we're going to, we're going to go here and then we're going to do all this. I'm going to tell you about it. I'm going to tell you about it. Okay, shut up. Just tell me.
- [118:38]
H
Yeah, I'm going to tell you about. But first, did you know that if.
- [118:42]
B
You have this, if you want to sign up for our private academy, then I'll take you there and I'll teach you there? I mean, I want to see the ballistic stuff. I've been watching nonstop this ballistic stuff. I've been talking to sources who were there who are close. I mean, surgeons, doctors, lawyers, all of it. I mean, literally my phone is blowing up live right here while we're live on the show right now with information. So anyway, we all want answers, but we certainly don't want to jump to conclusions on things. That's why I've been trying to. It's very easy to join in the hysteria of this, but I just want to present what we know from the video evidence and ask questions about the things that we're not being told and why we're being. Why information is being kept from us. But, you know, I'm not making big leaps and saying it was Mossad. Show me the evidence, I will report. John Solomon, investigative journalist, was on Hannity seven hours after the shooting. Did I put that sound bite in there, by the way? John Solomon, maybe I didn't.
- [119:55]
E
No, you didn't. Drop it in.
- [119:57]
B
Okay. Anyway, he was on handed about seven hours after the shooting and he said he was speaking to the FBI agents, people he knows well in Washington. He's a Washington, D.C. investigative reporter. And he said live on the air, he said there are multiple suspects that they're looking at and foreign intelligence is involved. Foreign intelligence and multiple suspects. He wouldn't have just said that if he hadn't had specific contact from people in the three letter agency that told him that information before he went on Hannity and reported it. Because it's a much more convenient story to just say it was this guy who had a trans lover and he. And he killed him. That's it. No, nothing else to see. Here he specifically said foreign intelligence. So that's a data point. Do we have other specific evidence? The airplane that was. Was leaving at the time that changed its tracking information. There were 14 Israeli phones, cell phones, in the audience that day, which is maybe a data point, maybe important, maybe not. There could be foreign students who happen to have Israeli phones that they bought when they lived in Israel and they're going to university in Utah Valley University, perhaps. Again, data points, all worth questioning. Is the CIA involved? Why did this kid go to the school in 2021 for, like, one semester and then drop out? He had a 4.0 GPA. He had a scholarship. He had a presidential scholarship, by the way. And this school is like a known CIA recruiting school, Utah Valley University. Is there a CIA connection worth chasing down? Yeah. Again, I want all things out on the table. I don't want to cover up anything. Why is Netanyahu doing, like, a full PR campaign? Press every five seconds about Charlie Kirk. It's very interesting. And he wants us to go to war with Qatar. It's Qatari. That's what. That's what killed Charlie Kirk. It was Islamist Qataris that killed Charlie Kirk. Really? Okay. Overcompensating much? Benjamin Netanyahu. So, again, I want answers to all of this. Anyway, thank you guys so much for hanging out with us on a Thursday. This is the after show. Yeah. Natalie had to go and pick up the kids, so, you know, I got to hang out and talk UFOs and other things with you guys. So thanks so much for hanging out with us on this Thursday. Much love to all of you. We'll have content. We have a couple of big interviews coming out this weekend, actually, that I'm excited to share with you, stuff you don't know about yet, and so keep your eye out for that as well. And we will be back here live on Monday at 4pm Eastern time. Sorry that I'm sick. Sorry that I've got this, like, runny nose, stuffy nose that makes me sound like, I don't know, like an elephant or something. So thank you for suffering with my terrible voice and nose condition today on the show. Have a great night, everyone. We'll see you back here real soon.