Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

‼️EXPOSED: Salt Lake Tribune Video Exposes Major Problem With Official Narrative — Why Did Armed Officer Alan Robertson Run AWAY From the Shot? 👀 He’s on the balcony by the Losee Center with his firearm in hand when the shot rings out. According to the official story, a .30-06... just went off right beside him — the round would’ve traveled almost over his shoulder. So what does an armed officer do? He runs the opposite direction… down toward the tent where Charlie was, instead of toward the Losee building where the shot supposedly came from. He was armed. Ready. Standing right there. Yet he moves away from the alleged shooter. In the same video, the other plainclothes USU officer next to him can be heard asking “Where did it come from?” They were both on that balcony. If a rifle shot cracked off that close, both of them should’ve known exactly where it originated. The round would’ve been unmistakable and according to Bagley, Robertson is the one who later suggested checking the Losee building because it had line of sight. Something doesn’t add up. Also strange: almost zero online footprint for this guy beyond the fact that he made more money than other officers in California before moving here. No family. No history. It looks scrubbed. Why run away from the shooter if you’re armed and the shot just happened right next to you? I’ll keep digging. Drop any receipts you have on Alan Robertson. Shoutout to KK Follow Her For Her Great Research And Deep Dives!show more

Project Constitution

296,973 subscribers

90,576 Aufrufe • vor 26 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

‼️BREAKING: Newly Released WITNESS Statement Directly CONTRADICTS the Official Charlie Kirk Shooting Narrative 👀 A witness statement just released through a GRAMA request describes hearing the shot that killed Charlie Kirk coming from behind them and to their right, at a high position, not from the Losee Building as officials have claimed. The witness was sitting in the front row on the left side of the stage. When the shot rang out, they immediately turned and looked over their right shoulder toward the back right area. They described the sound as coming from an elevated position, not ground level, and said it was so loud and close that it felt like it was right behind them. This directly contradicts the official story that the shot came from the Losee Building on the opposite side. Instead, this witness places the origin of the shot on Charlie Kirk’s right side, from an elevated position behind the crowd. If this witness is accurate, the entire official timeline and shooter location falls apart. Once again, the public is being forced to rely on independent document requests just to get basic facts about one of the most high-profile political assassinations in decades. FROM: @hardbeingmanny on instagram ⚠️My channel is under attack to try to bankrupt me. If you want to support me and help me keep exposing these clowns Donate here:🔗

Project Constitution

17,884 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Candace stands her ground that this was an INTELLIGENCE/MILITARY type operation with multiple ACTORS for distractions. -Was Lance "Twiggs" one of the other people than we seen at UVU on the day of the shooting? - George Zinn had to receive medical attention the day of the shooting and stated to multiple people at the hospital that he said he acted like he k*lled Charlie because he said he was going to be paid for doing it. - We know of 4 potential "ACTORS" George Zinn, Maroon shirt guy, The guy on the stairs, and the guy on the Losee building. These could all and MOST LIKELY all be distractions to take attention away from the real killer. - Candace states that she believes Tyler's role in all of it had something to do with the changing of outfits to confuse investigators because he was seen putting a change of clothes in the graveyard and then is seen at the DQ in the infamous picture. - The reason coming to this conclusion is because we never see the "person" on the Losee building ever take a shot, we just see him running, and the guy in the maroon shirt, looks, and has a different build from the guy on the stairs in the black shirt and hat. - We know now with all the evidence we have gathered and concluded from this point that there is no way Charlie was shot with a .30-06 round or from the roof of the Losee building because of the alleged autopsy report that claims his C2 vertebrae broke first and by the location and angle of the alleged "entrance wound" that looks more like an "exit wound." - The bullet would of had to enter Charlie through his mouth or jaw in order to physically break the C2 bone first, pull a 90 degree angle and continue to break the C7. None of it makes any sense if the alleged autopsy report is 100% official as it claims. Plus they said they found the bullet right beneath the skin. - He had to be shot from a different location with a smaller round or some kind of other projectile weapon/round. This was a highly orchestrated hit and it has intelligence written all over it. I have came to all the same conclusions in my previous posts and stand with Candace. The writing is on the wall. cc: Candace Owens

Candace stands her ground that this was an INTELLIGENCE/MILITARY type operation with multiple ACTORS for distractions. -Was Lance "Twiggs" one of the other people than we seen at UVU on the day of the shooting? - George Zinn had to receive medical attention the day of the shooting and stated to multiple people at the hospital that he said he acted like he k*lled Charlie because he said he was going to be paid for doing it. - We know of 4 potential "ACTORS" George Zinn, Maroon shirt guy, The guy on the stairs, and the guy on the Losee building. These could all and MOST LIKELY all be distractions to take attention away from the real killer. - Candace states that she believes Tyler's role in all of it had something to do with the changing of outfits to confuse investigators because he was seen putting a change of clothes in the graveyard and then is seen at the DQ in the infamous picture. - The reason coming to this conclusion is because we never see the "person" on the Losee building ever take a shot, we just see him running, and the guy in the maroon shirt, looks, and has a different build from the guy on the stairs in the black shirt and hat. - We know now with all the evidence we have gathered and concluded from this point that there is no way Charlie was shot with a .30-06 round or from the roof of the Losee building because of the alleged autopsy report that claims his C2 vertebrae broke first and by the location and angle of the alleged "entrance wound" that looks more like an "exit wound." - The bullet would of had to enter Charlie through his mouth or jaw in order to physically break the C2 bone first, pull a 90 degree angle and continue to break the C7. None of it makes any sense if the alleged autopsy report is 100% official as it claims. Plus they said they found the bullet right beneath the skin. - He had to be shot from a different location with a smaller round or some kind of other projectile weapon/round. This was a highly orchestrated hit and it has intelligence written all over it. I have came to all the same conclusions in my previous posts and stand with Candace. The writing is on the wall. cc: Candace Owens

The SCIF

146,753 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

‼️ New Roof Footage Appears To Show SECOND PERSON Sprinting Toward Shooter’s Position On Losee ROOF During Charlie Kirk Assassination 👀 This clip appears to show a second person on the roof of the Losee Center sprinting toward the exact corner the shot allegedly came from. Watch it closely. Right as the shot rings out, you can see what looks like a second figure moving across the roof. It almost appears as if someone tried to remove that person from the footage frame by frame — but they didn’t do a clean job. A faint “ghost” image of the running figure remains visible. The official story has always claimed a single shooter. This footage raises serious questions about whether that narrative is accurate — or whether someone was deliberately scrubbed from the video. If this was edited, the question becomes: Who was really on that roof? The more footage that surfaces, the more the single-shooter story starts to crack. Watch the clip and tell me what you see. More coming. Follow for the receipts they don’t want you to have. From: Joel FOLLOW Them! CC: Candace Owens

‼️ New Roof Footage Appears To Show SECOND PERSON Sprinting Toward Shooter’s Position On Losee ROOF During Charlie Kirk Assassination 👀 This clip appears to show a second person on the roof of the Losee Center sprinting toward the exact corner the shot allegedly came from. Watch it closely. Right as the shot rings out, you can see what looks like a second figure moving across the roof. It almost appears as if someone tried to remove that person from the footage frame by frame — but they didn’t do a clean job. A faint “ghost” image of the running figure remains visible. The official story has always claimed a single shooter. This footage raises serious questions about whether that narrative is accurate — or whether someone was deliberately scrubbed from the video. If this was edited, the question becomes: Who was really on that roof? The more footage that surfaces, the more the single-shooter story starts to crack. Watch the clip and tell me what you see. More coming. Follow for the receipts they don’t want you to have. From: Joel FOLLOW Them! CC: Candace Owens

Project Constitution

998,877 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

3D reconstruction & analysis of Charlie Kirk assassination that speaks volumes. 4 different shooter location perspectives with line of sight and shot trajectory line with very interesting conclusions. Also includes sound analysis of official narrative which is the most important and telling results, which breaks the official narrative once again. - The sound analysis and the video proved that we heard the shot and saw Charlie getting shot at the same time, when Charlie should of been shot first then we would of heard the sound of the shot if it was at 150 yards with the rifle they claim shot Charlie, considering the speed of the bullet and the speed of sound. - This conclusion means that the shot had to come from a closer proximity, from 50 yards or less, not 150 yards, considering that we do know exactly where the video and audio was taken from, and how far it was away from Charlie. Watch the full video for full context and to understand all 4 shooter locations and sound analysis conclusion. It's starting to narrow down some possibilities, which is great. Little by little we move closer to the truth. Thoughts, comments, and speculation down below, the more eyes and theories the better. cc: Trigger Smart

3D reconstruction & analysis of Charlie Kirk assassination that speaks volumes. 4 different shooter location perspectives with line of sight and shot trajectory line with very interesting conclusions. Also includes sound analysis of official narrative which is the most important and telling results, which breaks the official narrative once again. - The sound analysis and the video proved that we heard the shot and saw Charlie getting shot at the same time, when Charlie should of been shot first then we would of heard the sound of the shot if it was at 150 yards with the rifle they claim shot Charlie, considering the speed of the bullet and the speed of sound. - This conclusion means that the shot had to come from a closer proximity, from 50 yards or less, not 150 yards, considering that we do know exactly where the video and audio was taken from, and how far it was away from Charlie. Watch the full video for full context and to understand all 4 shooter locations and sound analysis conclusion. It's starting to narrow down some possibilities, which is great. Little by little we move closer to the truth. Thoughts, comments, and speculation down below, the more eyes and theories the better. cc: Trigger Smart

The SCIF

63,486 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

‼️EXCLUSIVE: Crystal Clear FOOTAGE Showing Suspect on the Losee Roof — And It Raises MAJOR Problems With The Fed's Case.👀 This is the video the feds didn’t want you to see. Candace Owens just released exclusive footage that shows the individual on top of the Losee Center performing a controlled lateral crawl — a deliberate sideways movement commonly trained in military tactics — as he moves toward the corner of the building. He then drops into a prone position and remains there for roughly 20 seconds before suddenly getting up and sprinting away. At no point in the clearest video we have seen so far is there any visible muzzle flash, recoil, or indication that a shot was actually fired from that position. The movement looks practiced. The sequence does not match the simple “random kid takes his first shot” narrative that has been pushed from the beginning. FOLLOW Candace Owens , RT and watch her FULL episode linked below.👇

‼️EXCLUSIVE: Crystal Clear FOOTAGE Showing Suspect on the Losee Roof — And It Raises MAJOR Problems With The Fed's Case.👀 This is the video the feds didn’t want you to see. Candace Owens just released exclusive footage that shows the individual on top of the Losee Center performing a controlled lateral crawl — a deliberate sideways movement commonly trained in military tactics — as he moves toward the corner of the building. He then drops into a prone position and remains there for roughly 20 seconds before suddenly getting up and sprinting away. At no point in the clearest video we have seen so far is there any visible muzzle flash, recoil, or indication that a shot was actually fired from that position. The movement looks practiced. The sequence does not match the simple “random kid takes his first shot” narrative that has been pushed from the beginning. FOLLOW Candace Owens , RT and watch her FULL episode linked below.👇

Project Constitution

1,035,623 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

‼️Newly Found DRONE Footage From The Losee Building ROOF (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Sept 11) — Creates A MASSIVE Problem For The Official Story! The video shows the alleged “impressions” in the rocks where they claim the assassin was lying in the prone position when he took the shot that killed Charlie. There’s also an evidence marker right next to those marks — presumably the same spot where they say they recovered the screwdriver that supposedly had Tyler Robinson’s DNA on it. Now look closer. There’s a raised lip at the edge of that roof. Looks to be about 6 inches high. If someone is lying prone and trying to fire over that edge, that lip is directly in the way. It changes the angle, the stability, and the line of sight. This is not a clean, unobstructed prone position like they’ve been selling. So the question is simple: How exactly does a shooter lying flat on that roof clear a 6-inch lip and make a precision shot… while also leaving clean “impressions” right there? The official narrative needs this rooftop position to work perfectly. This footage makes it look a lot less perfect. Watch it yourself and tell me what you see. CC: Candace Owens

‼️Newly Found DRONE Footage From The Losee Building ROOF (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Sept 11) — Creates A MASSIVE Problem For The Official Story! The video shows the alleged “impressions” in the rocks where they claim the assassin was lying in the prone position when he took the shot that killed Charlie. There’s also an evidence marker right next to those marks — presumably the same spot where they say they recovered the screwdriver that supposedly had Tyler Robinson’s DNA on it. Now look closer. There’s a raised lip at the edge of that roof. Looks to be about 6 inches high. If someone is lying prone and trying to fire over that edge, that lip is directly in the way. It changes the angle, the stability, and the line of sight. This is not a clean, unobstructed prone position like they’ve been selling. So the question is simple: How exactly does a shooter lying flat on that roof clear a 6-inch lip and make a precision shot… while also leaving clean “impressions” right there? The official narrative needs this rooftop position to work perfectly. This footage makes it look a lot less perfect. Watch it yourself and tell me what you see. CC: Candace Owens

Project Constitution

109,368 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

‼️Candace Owens Just Exposed a MASSIVE Hole in the Rooftop Story — And It STRONGLY Suggests the SCREWDRIVER Was Planted 👀 During the preliminary hearing, Officer Chris Bagley admitted he went up to the Losee Center rooftop with a man in civilian clothes who was carrying a gun and wearing a badge. Bagley said he had no idea who the man was or what agency he worked for. Even more shocking, Bagley never bothered to review his own bodycam footage to see who else was on that roof between the time the alleged shooter jumped off and when he arrived. Candace pointed out how absurd this is. In the middle of the biggest manhunt in recent memory, an officer runs onto an active crime scene rooftop with a complete stranger holding a gun, doesn’t verify who he is, and then never bothers to check the footage afterward to see if anyone else had been up there. She also noted that none of the influencers who claimed they saw everything in crystal clear “4K HD” ever mentioned this mystery armed man on the roof. This is why Candace believes the screwdriver was likely planted later. The official story still can’t explain why the shooter would’ve been holding a screwdriver on the rooftop in the first place — and now we know the only officer who supposedly found it has massive gaps in his memory about who was even up there with him. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL episode linked below.👇

‼️Candace Owens Just Exposed a MASSIVE Hole in the Rooftop Story — And It STRONGLY Suggests the SCREWDRIVER Was Planted 👀 During the preliminary hearing, Officer Chris Bagley admitted he went up to the Losee Center rooftop with a man in civilian clothes who was carrying a gun and wearing a badge. Bagley said he had no idea who the man was or what agency he worked for. Even more shocking, Bagley never bothered to review his own bodycam footage to see who else was on that roof between the time the alleged shooter jumped off and when he arrived. Candace pointed out how absurd this is. In the middle of the biggest manhunt in recent memory, an officer runs onto an active crime scene rooftop with a complete stranger holding a gun, doesn’t verify who he is, and then never bothers to check the footage afterward to see if anyone else had been up there. She also noted that none of the influencers who claimed they saw everything in crystal clear “4K HD” ever mentioned this mystery armed man on the roof. This is why Candace believes the screwdriver was likely planted later. The official story still can’t explain why the shooter would’ve been holding a screwdriver on the rooftop in the first place — and now we know the only officer who supposedly found it has massive gaps in his memory about who was even up there with him. FOLLOW Candace Owens, RT and watch her FULL episode linked below.👇

Project Constitution

17,325 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

‼️BREAKING: Candace Owens REVEALS The Identity Of The Mystery OFFICER On The Losee ROOFTOP With Officer Bagley! 👀 Officer Bagley testified he was on the Losee building rooftop with a plain-clothes officer… but claimed he couldn’t remember the man’s name or anything about him. Candace just identified him. Bystander footage from 12:47 PM shows the second man clearly. He is Officer Alan Robinson of the Utah State University Department of Public Safety — not even a UVU officer. Robinson had only joined the USU police force the summer before. On paper he was a relative newcomer sent over as general reinforcement. Yet in the early footage he appears to be the one directing activity on that rooftop. Officer Bagley, for reasons still unexplained, could not (or would not) name him under oath. A brand-new officer from a different university ends up on the critical rooftop minutes after the shooting, seems to be running the show, and the only UVU officer up there with him suddenly has amnesia about his identity. Candace is right — this is not tracking. FOLLOW Candace Owens RT this, and watch her FULL episode linked below. 👇

Project Constitution

94,594 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen

🇺🇸 FIRST SHOT: It’s tough to see, but I think I found the muzzle flash from the first shot. This makes or breaks the situation. It’s important to know where the first shot came from. It looks like the shot came from the direction of the suspect, upwards. Theories: 1) An agent fumbles his gun and it falls there, hence they all scream “GUN!” They mean a second gun. The shot is unaided, just random. 2) An agent shot upwards? Seems unlikely. Why would others scream “gun” and run after seeing an agent with a gun? 3) The guy took away the gun? But he was on his elbows literally a second before the shot was fired.

🇺🇸 FIRST SHOT: It’s tough to see, but I think I found the muzzle flash from the first shot. This makes or breaks the situation. It’s important to know where the first shot came from. It looks like the shot came from the direction of the suspect, upwards. Theories: 1) An agent fumbles his gun and it falls there, hence they all scream “GUN!” They mean a second gun. The shot is unaided, just random. 2) An agent shot upwards? Seems unlikely. Why would others scream “gun” and run after seeing an agent with a gun? 3) The guy took away the gun? But he was on his elbows literally a second before the shot was fired.

Lord Bebo

36,134 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

🚨BREAKING: Newly released ICE agent camera footage directly contradicts the claim that Renee Nicole Good tried to hit an agent with her vehicle. From the agent’s own angle, it’s clear Renee Nicole Good never posed a threat. In the synchronized footage, you can see her wife attempting to get into the car. They are preparing to leave. Suddenly, multiple ICE agents rush the vehicle. One agent moves toward the driver’s door and attempts to open it, trying to pull her out. Renee backs up. She then clearly turns the wheel AWAY from the agent. The agent has an unobstructed view of the steering wheel on his phone. He can see she is turning the car away, not toward him. That is when he pulls his gun. He does not draw his weapon because she is threatening him with the vehicle, he can see she is turning AWAY from him. He draws it to stop her from leaving. As the car turns away, the agent leans over the hood and fires the first shot. By the second shot, he is already further to the side of the vehicle. By the third shot, the car is driving away. Every single shot was fired after it was clear the vehicle was moving AWAY from him. Those shots were not fired to protect his life. They were fired to stop her from leaving. That is not self-defense. That is lethal force used to prevent escape. That is murder.

🚨BREAKING: Newly released ICE agent camera footage directly contradicts the claim that Renee Nicole Good tried to hit an agent with her vehicle. From the agent’s own angle, it’s clear Renee Nicole Good never posed a threat. In the synchronized footage, you can see her wife attempting to get into the car. They are preparing to leave. Suddenly, multiple ICE agents rush the vehicle. One agent moves toward the driver’s door and attempts to open it, trying to pull her out. Renee backs up. She then clearly turns the wheel AWAY from the agent. The agent has an unobstructed view of the steering wheel on his phone. He can see she is turning the car away, not toward him. That is when he pulls his gun. He does not draw his weapon because she is threatening him with the vehicle, he can see she is turning AWAY from him. He draws it to stop her from leaving. As the car turns away, the agent leans over the hood and fires the first shot. By the second shot, he is already further to the side of the vehicle. By the third shot, the car is driving away. Every single shot was fired after it was clear the vehicle was moving AWAY from him. Those shots were not fired to protect his life. They were fired to stop her from leaving. That is not self-defense. That is lethal force used to prevent escape. That is murder.

Jesus Freakin Congress

328,400 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

If you wanna know what they’re looking for I have the answers to most of your questions. What they’re looking for is secondary bullet fragmentation. I strongly believe that they are looking for a secondary bullet fragments. In the first video, you’ll see proof that the front wound on the victim is an exit. As the bullet bounced off the table and hit the security guard. The second video shows some of the police/security from Charlie’s team congregating right where the man was struck then you will see them looking around, and then the officer grabs the microphone and pointed in the same direction that it appears that the secondary fragmentation may have flew off after it struck the security guard non-penetrating strike. The third video is showing more detail from when the security was struck with the secondary fragment it hit him so hard. It gave him a Charlie horse pun intended. But it hit him so hard he couldn’t use his arm to jump that gate. You could see him trying to slip it through in between the security gates and that’s the reason why his watch got scuffed and damaged. The screenshot is showing a better view of the officer saying this way that way if the shot came from the Losee Center then why are they directing people towards that direction? The enter is is he’s telling the other people that are congregated by the gate. That way it went that way I believe that is exactly what’s going on there.

If you wanna know what they’re looking for I have the answers to most of your questions. What they’re looking for is secondary bullet fragmentation. I strongly believe that they are looking for a secondary bullet fragments. In the first video, you’ll see proof that the front wound on the victim is an exit. As the bullet bounced off the table and hit the security guard. The second video shows some of the police/security from Charlie’s team congregating right where the man was struck then you will see them looking around, and then the officer grabs the microphone and pointed in the same direction that it appears that the secondary fragmentation may have flew off after it struck the security guard non-penetrating strike. The third video is showing more detail from when the security was struck with the secondary fragment it hit him so hard. It gave him a Charlie horse pun intended. But it hit him so hard he couldn’t use his arm to jump that gate. You could see him trying to slip it through in between the security gates and that’s the reason why his watch got scuffed and damaged. The screenshot is showing a better view of the officer saying this way that way if the shot came from the Losee Center then why are they directing people towards that direction? The enter is is he’s telling the other people that are congregated by the gate. That way it went that way I believe that is exactly what’s going on there.

ClydeMax369

18,635 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk 🚨 Muzzle Flash: Second Shooter Location, Reflection, or Both? This video captures a flash on a window right as Charlie Kirk was shot. Let’s break this down… follow the numbers on the videos. #1. This video shows what appears to be a muzzle flash, just as Charlie is shot, leading people to believe the shooter was to Charlie’s right.. Notate the people to the left of the flash #2. This photo shows the location of the flash. Notate people to the left, on a middle-landing on a staircase. #3. This photo shows a clearer image showing both the middle-landing and the same location of the flash. It is a window. #4 . This video shows the building behind Charlie, which is a long hallway. This debunks any claims the shot came from here. — I zoom in where Charlie was — I zoom in on staircase — I zoom in on the window/flash — I zoom in on where suspected shooter was #5. I notate the flash reflection angles. — Video angle #1 notated — two reflection paths notated in relation to Video angle #1. 1. Reflection angle shows where we were told the shooter was. 2. Reflection angle shows mirrored angle, obviously where there is no reports of a shooter being in. 🔻 Final conclusion: This to me is very likely a muzzle flash reflection from a far off location. I am unsure of the reflection angle however, but this can be 100% proven if someone were to recreate the angles… maybe with a flash camera. If anyone is willing to, or has the means to do this (safely), this will either prove the shot came where the FBI said it came from, or it will prove there was a second shooter, in the direction of the mirrored angle.

UPDATE: Charlie Kirk 🚨 Muzzle Flash: Second Shooter Location, Reflection, or Both? This video captures a flash on a window right as Charlie Kirk was shot. Let’s break this down… follow the numbers on the videos. #1. This video shows what appears to be a muzzle flash, just as Charlie is shot, leading people to believe the shooter was to Charlie’s right.. Notate the people to the left of the flash #2. This photo shows the location of the flash. Notate people to the left, on a middle-landing on a staircase. #3. This photo shows a clearer image showing both the middle-landing and the same location of the flash. It is a window. #4 . This video shows the building behind Charlie, which is a long hallway. This debunks any claims the shot came from here. — I zoom in where Charlie was — I zoom in on staircase — I zoom in on the window/flash — I zoom in on where suspected shooter was #5. I notate the flash reflection angles. — Video angle #1 notated — two reflection paths notated in relation to Video angle #1. 1. Reflection angle shows where we were told the shooter was. 2. Reflection angle shows mirrored angle, obviously where there is no reports of a shooter being in. 🔻 Final conclusion: This to me is very likely a muzzle flash reflection from a far off location. I am unsure of the reflection angle however, but this can be 100% proven if someone were to recreate the angles… maybe with a flash camera. If anyone is willing to, or has the means to do this (safely), this will either prove the shot came where the FBI said it came from, or it will prove there was a second shooter, in the direction of the mirrored angle.

MJTruthUltra

10,665,164 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

🚨 EYEWITNESS DROPS NUCLEAR CONFIRMATION: Charlie Kirk SHOT POINT-BLANK in the CHEST – TWO SHOOTERS PROVEN! A front-row eyewitness—standing RIGHT IN FRONT of Charlie Kirk on his RIGHT SIDE— just shattered the official "single shooter from behind" BS. This guy's account? Straight fire. He watched in HORROR as Kirk took a DEADLY STRETCH SHOT STRAIGHT TO THE HEART and the Wound BLEEDS Through Shirt. His words: "Like, it was a stretch shot to the heart. And look right, right where his heart is. It started going red. He fell back and went to his side. Then I look down at the crowd. And look like the crowd all went to the knees really fast." Crowd DROPS like dominoes—no trampling, no chaos from a "lone gunman" scramble. Eyewitness hit the deck too: "I, kind of, did go to my knees as fast everybody, cause I wanted to see if anyone who was close to the shooter would be trampling all over that person. And I saw nothing like that at all... They were just not moving." Then? Panic pushes him backstage. Blood SOAKING his shirt from the CHEST— not just neck. This lines up PERFECTLY with the palm gun shooter we've been screaming about. TWO SHOOTERS: One from behind (neck?), one from FRONT (heart-piercing kill shot). Cover-up much? Official story crumbling FAST. Who silenced Kirk? Deep State? Foreign ops? Drop your takes BELOW— this is the thread that pulls it all together!

🚨 EYEWITNESS DROPS NUCLEAR CONFIRMATION: Charlie Kirk SHOT POINT-BLANK in the CHEST – TWO SHOOTERS PROVEN! A front-row eyewitness—standing RIGHT IN FRONT of Charlie Kirk on his RIGHT SIDE— just shattered the official "single shooter from behind" BS. This guy's account? Straight fire. He watched in HORROR as Kirk took a DEADLY STRETCH SHOT STRAIGHT TO THE HEART and the Wound BLEEDS Through Shirt. His words: "Like, it was a stretch shot to the heart. And look right, right where his heart is. It started going red. He fell back and went to his side. Then I look down at the crowd. And look like the crowd all went to the knees really fast." Crowd DROPS like dominoes—no trampling, no chaos from a "lone gunman" scramble. Eyewitness hit the deck too: "I, kind of, did go to my knees as fast everybody, cause I wanted to see if anyone who was close to the shooter would be trampling all over that person. And I saw nothing like that at all... They were just not moving." Then? Panic pushes him backstage. Blood SOAKING his shirt from the CHEST— not just neck. This lines up PERFECTLY with the palm gun shooter we've been screaming about. TWO SHOOTERS: One from behind (neck?), one from FRONT (heart-piercing kill shot). Cover-up much? Official story crumbling FAST. Who silenced Kirk? Deep State? Foreign ops? Drop your takes BELOW— this is the thread that pulls it all together!

Project Constitution

52,867 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

While covering a Pro-IRANIAN REGIME demonstration in Philadelphia (no one had an Iranian flag, unsurprisingly), a protester defending the Islamic Regime of Iran decided to spit on Frank Scales while others tried to impede his movement. A Philadelphia Police Civil Affairs officer was right there to witness the entire thing, but instead of pursuing the assailant, the cop decided to argue with Frank. The cop told him to “go over there” where he wouldn’t be able to document the protest. He complied with the officer and later approached him to see if he found who spit on him. The officer claimed he was not over there to witness it. An outright lie. He went on to argue that if Frank wasn’t in the middle of the protest he wouldn’t have gotten spit on. What he failed to mention was that he was actually not in the middle of the protest. He was 10 feet away from the demonstration trying to move away from people following him when he got spit on. Why aren’t the Civil Affairs Officers in Philadelphia upholding citizen’s rights to move freely without being spit on?

While covering a Pro-IRANIAN REGIME demonstration in Philadelphia (no one had an Iranian flag, unsurprisingly), a protester defending the Islamic Regime of Iran decided to spit on Frank Scales while others tried to impede his movement. A Philadelphia Police Civil Affairs officer was right there to witness the entire thing, but instead of pursuing the assailant, the cop decided to argue with Frank. The cop told him to “go over there” where he wouldn’t be able to document the protest. He complied with the officer and later approached him to see if he found who spit on him. The officer claimed he was not over there to witness it. An outright lie. He went on to argue that if Frank wasn’t in the middle of the protest he wouldn’t have gotten spit on. What he failed to mention was that he was actually not in the middle of the protest. He was 10 feet away from the demonstration trying to move away from people following him when he got spit on. Why aren’t the Civil Affairs Officers in Philadelphia upholding citizen’s rights to move freely without being spit on?

SurgePhilly

25,910 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

THE MYSTERIOUS CASE OF THE OTHER MICROPHONE MAN: COOPER BROWN—AND THE ORIGINAL WITNESS TESTIMONY THAT CHARLIE KIRK WAS SHOT IN THE CHEST Candace Owens Baron Coleman Jimmy Dore 18 minutes after Charlie Kirk was k*lled, Cooper Brown infamously physically stopped Jeb Jacobi from telling us Charlie had been shot in the neck. That was at 12:42 PM MDT. And then Cooper himself went on Fox News later that day to tell us the exact same thing at about 6:35 PM MDT. Have you ever wondered what explains this sequence of events? It might have something to do with the fact that there seemed to be an original narrative earlier in the afternoon that Charlie had been shot in the chest, but which was soon changed to the story we know now that he'd been shot in the neck. Shot in the chest = Narrative 1.0 Shot in the neck = Narrative 2.0 One witness, "Sarah from Draper", went on national TV at 1:17 PM MDT to tell us that Charlie had been shot in the chest (Narrative 1.0). Then she went on TV again at 2:08 PM MDT, just 51 minutes later, and changed her story to Charlie having been shot in the neck (Narrative 2.0). When Jeb Jacobi told everyone that Charlie had been shot in the neck, it's possible that Cooper Brown was still operating on the pre-established Narrative 1.0, "Shot in the chest," and Cooper intervened to stop Jeb's narrative from getting out. At that moment in time, from Cooper's POV (allegedly), the official Narrative (1.0) was supposed to be a chest shot. Later, after the Narrative had to be modified to 2.0, Cooper went on national news to help establish the new version—along with the rest of the fake narrative: that Charlie had been taken out by a disgruntled Leftist. Nevermind that Tyler Robinson hadn't yet been captured. ONE POSSIBLE EXPLANATION SCENARIO (ALLEGEDLY): Charlie's mic or necklace was supposed to explode, simulating a .30-06 shot to the chest. Something unanticipated happened creating a neck wound. Cooper's back was to the scene as it happened, so he didn't see the neck wound. But he did inadvertently tell us that he turned around due to the sound of the "POP!" (which must have come from behind him to his right). This was the Rode Mic (or maybe necklace) exploding. Once the police herded everyone into the Sorenson Student Center, that's where we got the confrontation between him and Jeb Jacobi. Cooper didn't yet know the shifted narrative: he hadn't seen what happened, and was still programmed to enforce Narrative 1.0, the chest shot. About 35 minutes after the Brown/Jacobi altercation, "Sarah From Draper"—herself still operating on Narrative 1.0—went on TV to tell us Charlie was shot in the chest. Sometime after that, whomever was orchestring this narrative control and cover-up, issued the new directive: Narrative 2.0, Charlie was shot in the neck. And just 51 minutes later, Sarah was paraded out on TV again to establish the new tall tale. And then Cooper Brown was sent onto Fox News, not once but twice: once the evening of the 10th, and another time in the early afternoon on September 11th. The second time, he helped parrot the other critical part of the anchoring narrative: that Charlie had been taken out by a disgruntled Leftist. And then, "ABRACADABRA!" a few hours later, Tyler Robinson would turn himself in. And the rest, as they say, is history. NOTES ON JEB JACOBI: Some have observed Jeb Jacobi's odd video rehearsal with Phil Lyman a few minutes after Charlie's death, just before the altercation with Cooper Brown. Why was he rehearsing his testimony that Charlie had been shot in the neck? Is it because it was different from the original narrative he was supposed to give us? It's also been noted that Jacobi was the only other person known to have covered his ears or grabbed his head, besides Hunter Kozak, when Charlie was killed. Why were they the only ones in the crowd that reacted this way? Then, somehow, Jacobi appeared on "60 Minutes" with Hunter Kozak, where they both helped anchor the original narrative that Leftist violence is the problem and that we need more open dialogue. This helped reinforce the "trans-furry Leftist Tyler Robinson did it" patsy narrative. Was the Jacobi-Brown altercation a case of two different hands of the same corrupt body reacting on the fly to a situation that had gone awry—not realizing that they were each playing a movie role for the same Director? DISCLAIMER: This is just a possible theoretical interpretation of events, given the information we have, and no actual guilt is being imputed, nor am I making any accusations. H/t: Charliesangels47 for finding the before and after Sarah footage.

THE MYSTERIOUS CASE OF THE OTHER MICROPHONE MAN: COOPER BROWN—AND THE ORIGINAL WITNESS TESTIMONY THAT CHARLIE KIRK WAS SHOT IN THE CHEST Candace Owens Baron Coleman Jimmy Dore 18 minutes after Charlie Kirk was k*lled, Cooper Brown infamously physically stopped Jeb Jacobi from telling us Charlie had been shot in the neck. That was at 12:42 PM MDT. And then Cooper himself went on Fox News later that day to tell us the exact same thing at about 6:35 PM MDT. Have you ever wondered what explains this sequence of events? It might have something to do with the fact that there seemed to be an original narrative earlier in the afternoon that Charlie had been shot in the chest, but which was soon changed to the story we know now that he'd been shot in the neck. Shot in the chest = Narrative 1.0 Shot in the neck = Narrative 2.0 One witness, "Sarah from Draper", went on national TV at 1:17 PM MDT to tell us that Charlie had been shot in the chest (Narrative 1.0). Then she went on TV again at 2:08 PM MDT, just 51 minutes later, and changed her story to Charlie having been shot in the neck (Narrative 2.0). When Jeb Jacobi told everyone that Charlie had been shot in the neck, it's possible that Cooper Brown was still operating on the pre-established Narrative 1.0, "Shot in the chest," and Cooper intervened to stop Jeb's narrative from getting out. At that moment in time, from Cooper's POV (allegedly), the official Narrative (1.0) was supposed to be a chest shot. Later, after the Narrative had to be modified to 2.0, Cooper went on national news to help establish the new version—along with the rest of the fake narrative: that Charlie had been taken out by a disgruntled Leftist. Nevermind that Tyler Robinson hadn't yet been captured. ONE POSSIBLE EXPLANATION SCENARIO (ALLEGEDLY): Charlie's mic or necklace was supposed to explode, simulating a .30-06 shot to the chest. Something unanticipated happened creating a neck wound. Cooper's back was to the scene as it happened, so he didn't see the neck wound. But he did inadvertently tell us that he turned around due to the sound of the "POP!" (which must have come from behind him to his right). This was the Rode Mic (or maybe necklace) exploding. Once the police herded everyone into the Sorenson Student Center, that's where we got the confrontation between him and Jeb Jacobi. Cooper didn't yet know the shifted narrative: he hadn't seen what happened, and was still programmed to enforce Narrative 1.0, the chest shot. About 35 minutes after the Brown/Jacobi altercation, "Sarah From Draper"—herself still operating on Narrative 1.0—went on TV to tell us Charlie was shot in the chest. Sometime after that, whomever was orchestring this narrative control and cover-up, issued the new directive: Narrative 2.0, Charlie was shot in the neck. And just 51 minutes later, Sarah was paraded out on TV again to establish the new tall tale. And then Cooper Brown was sent onto Fox News, not once but twice: once the evening of the 10th, and another time in the early afternoon on September 11th. The second time, he helped parrot the other critical part of the anchoring narrative: that Charlie had been taken out by a disgruntled Leftist. And then, "ABRACADABRA!" a few hours later, Tyler Robinson would turn himself in. And the rest, as they say, is history. NOTES ON JEB JACOBI: Some have observed Jeb Jacobi's odd video rehearsal with Phil Lyman a few minutes after Charlie's death, just before the altercation with Cooper Brown. Why was he rehearsing his testimony that Charlie had been shot in the neck? Is it because it was different from the original narrative he was supposed to give us? It's also been noted that Jacobi was the only other person known to have covered his ears or grabbed his head, besides Hunter Kozak, when Charlie was killed. Why were they the only ones in the crowd that reacted this way? Then, somehow, Jacobi appeared on "60 Minutes" with Hunter Kozak, where they both helped anchor the original narrative that Leftist violence is the problem and that we need more open dialogue. This helped reinforce the "trans-furry Leftist Tyler Robinson did it" patsy narrative. Was the Jacobi-Brown altercation a case of two different hands of the same corrupt body reacting on the fly to a situation that had gone awry—not realizing that they were each playing a movie role for the same Director? DISCLAIMER: This is just a possible theoretical interpretation of events, given the information we have, and no actual guilt is being imputed, nor am I making any accusations. H/t: Charliesangels47 for finding the before and after Sarah footage.

Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯

64,882 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Did Candace RUIN the OFFICIAL NARRATIVE by revealing that there was NO EXIT WOUND? Were they NEVER going to RELEASE ANY ANGLE from CHARLIE'S Perspective because it showed NO EXIT WOUND and the REAL SHOOTER? Was Charlie's killer a lot closer and in front of him and is this why we don't have any perspectives from Charlie's view, like THE FIRST CAMERA that they took the SD cards from? Candace say's she believes the shooter to be in the front and to the left in the crowd. Which lines up. The shooter was closer. People interviewed right after the shooting claimed it sounded a lot closer than where they say it was from, which would line up more with the "ENTRANCE WOUND" we see, what bones were broken first in his neck, and where they found the fragment of the bullet. The rifle or other gun sounds, etc., could have been all distractions, like the decoy shooters/George Zinn, to mask the sound and misdirect people from where the REAL SHOT came from. You must take into consideration how much misdirection and disinformation would be presented if this is indeed a MILITARY/INTELLIGENCE style operation. These people are very intelligent. Do NOT underestimate them. cc: Candace Owens

Did Candace RUIN the OFFICIAL NARRATIVE by revealing that there was NO EXIT WOUND? Were they NEVER going to RELEASE ANY ANGLE from CHARLIE'S Perspective because it showed NO EXIT WOUND and the REAL SHOOTER? Was Charlie's killer a lot closer and in front of him and is this why we don't have any perspectives from Charlie's view, like THE FIRST CAMERA that they took the SD cards from? Candace say's she believes the shooter to be in the front and to the left in the crowd. Which lines up. The shooter was closer. People interviewed right after the shooting claimed it sounded a lot closer than where they say it was from, which would line up more with the "ENTRANCE WOUND" we see, what bones were broken first in his neck, and where they found the fragment of the bullet. The rifle or other gun sounds, etc., could have been all distractions, like the decoy shooters/George Zinn, to mask the sound and misdirect people from where the REAL SHOT came from. You must take into consideration how much misdirection and disinformation would be presented if this is indeed a MILITARY/INTELLIGENCE style operation. These people are very intelligent. Do NOT underestimate them. cc: Candace Owens

The SCIF

36,744 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

‼️Candace Owens REVEALS That The Mystery Rooftop OFFICER Alan Robertson Is On a Brady List — Possible Dirty Cop?! 🤔 The plain-clothes officer who was on the Losee rooftop with Officer Bagley has been identified as Alan E. Robertson of Utah State University Police. Bagley claimed under oath he couldn’t remember the man’s name. Footage shows Robertson was right there with him — and appeared to be directing activity on the roof. Robertson is a former U.S. Marine and marksmanship instructor who previously worked for the San Bernardino Police Department in California before a sudden move to Utah. He has an entry on a Brady list website — a database used by prosecutors to flag officers with documented issues involving dishonesty, misconduct, or integrity problems that affect their credibility as witnesses. San Bernardino’s entries are blank because the department is not in full compliance with Brady disclosure rules. No public details of the incident are available. A relatively new out-of-town officer ends up on the critical rooftop minutes after the shooting, seems to be calling the shots, has his identity protected by Bagley, and carries a Brady flag from his previous department. Candace is asking for tips from anyone who worked with him in San Bernardino or the Marines. FOLLOW Candace Owens RT, and watch her FULL episode linked below. 👇

‼️Candace Owens REVEALS That The Mystery Rooftop OFFICER Alan Robertson Is On a Brady List — Possible Dirty Cop?! 🤔 The plain-clothes officer who was on the Losee rooftop with Officer Bagley has been identified as Alan E. Robertson of Utah State University Police. Bagley claimed under oath he couldn’t remember the man’s name. Footage shows Robertson was right there with him — and appeared to be directing activity on the roof. Robertson is a former U.S. Marine and marksmanship instructor who previously worked for the San Bernardino Police Department in California before a sudden move to Utah. He has an entry on a Brady list website — a database used by prosecutors to flag officers with documented issues involving dishonesty, misconduct, or integrity problems that affect their credibility as witnesses. San Bernardino’s entries are blank because the department is not in full compliance with Brady disclosure rules. No public details of the incident are available. A relatively new out-of-town officer ends up on the critical rooftop minutes after the shooting, seems to be calling the shots, has his identity protected by Bagley, and carries a Brady flag from his previous department. Candace is asking for tips from anyone who worked with him in San Bernardino or the Marines. FOLLOW Candace Owens RT, and watch her FULL episode linked below. 👇

Project Constitution

66,915 Aufrufe • vor 27 Tagen

This man got pulled over for a traffic stop in another state while driving home. The officer asked him for his information, the man gave it to him. The officer came back, gave him the ticket, told him where to appear if he wanted to contest and pointed out where he could mail in the fee for the ticket since he didn’t live nearby. The man said okay. The officer asked if he had any questions, the man said no, the officer said be safe and that was that. So many people said that is a normal interaction with police officers. All the other stuff is someone seeking attention. 💯 It should be this easy every time. Kudos to both those men. 👏 When you do what you are asked to do, there is never a problem, imho. Is this how your traffic stops have went? (Mine did) Why can’t they all be like this for everyone?

This man got pulled over for a traffic stop in another state while driving home. The officer asked him for his information, the man gave it to him. The officer came back, gave him the ticket, told him where to appear if he wanted to contest and pointed out where he could mail in the fee for the ticket since he didn’t live nearby. The man said okay. The officer asked if he had any questions, the man said no, the officer said be safe and that was that. So many people said that is a normal interaction with police officers. All the other stuff is someone seeking attention. 💯 It should be this easy every time. Kudos to both those men. 👏 When you do what you are asked to do, there is never a problem, imho. Is this how your traffic stops have went? (Mine did) Why can’t they all be like this for everyone?

👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈

77,679 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

From a scouting perspective, Dach had a very impressive shift. He made an excellent defensive play deep in his zone to spin away from the opponent. Nice puck skills and speed exiting the zone, smart feed to Newhook on the rush, solid puck retrievals in the O zone, and chip to Newhook. A solid hit to take Fabbro out of the play went to the front of the net and bumped Fabbro away with the purpose of establishing a net-front presence. Even his shot was decent other than not raising the puck but that is often the case that close in...it was simply a great save. He also diligently got two more cracks at it, and had the right idea. Two more good saves. I loved that shift from him. If he does that consistently, he will start producing.

From a scouting perspective, Dach had a very impressive shift. He made an excellent defensive play deep in his zone to spin away from the opponent. Nice puck skills and speed exiting the zone, smart feed to Newhook on the rush, solid puck retrievals in the O zone, and chip to Newhook. A solid hit to take Fabbro out of the play went to the front of the net and bumped Fabbro away with the purpose of establishing a net-front presence. Even his shot was decent other than not raising the puck but that is often the case that close in...it was simply a great save. He also diligently got two more cracks at it, and had the right idea. Two more good saves. I loved that shift from him. If he does that consistently, he will start producing.

Grant McCagg

15,365 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr