#458 - Charlie Kirk Investigator UNLOADS on Rigged Case | Baron Coleman

This episode sponsored by She's Birdie. You lock the hotel room door, then check it again, and maybe one more time. Because even the nicest room can feel unfamiliar at night. That's why She's Birdie created BirdieBox. With She's Birdie, you can bring peace of mind with you. BirdieBox is a portable travel door alarm for hotels, dorms, Airbnbs, and anywhere you stay away from home. Just attach it to the door frame, switch it on. And if someone opens the door, BirdieBox blasts a loud siren and flashing alarm to alert you and everyone nearby. Because the best part of travel isn't worrying. It's sleeping soundly. BirdieBox from She's Birdie. Locking in peace of mind wherever you stay. For safer, more confident travel, visit She'sBirdie.com. That's S-H-E-S-B-I-R-D-I-E dot com. S-H-E-S-B-I-R-D-I-E dot com. If you have a reason to accept Tyler did it, that's fine. fine. So let's examine those reasons. And then they start throwing out reasons. Oh, there's DNA. Oh, there's this, there's that. Okay. Well, I have a problem with each of those issues and we could take them, you know, I'm sure we'll talk about it. Oh, we're going to do it. Yeah. I figured we would. It's just a little preview right now. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But, but if, if, if you're going to tell me, oh, these are the reasons here, the five stock answer reasons that, that I believe Tyler Robinson did it. And then I have a question on each one of those reasons and you say, okay, we're done talking about it. Go away. You're evil. That's crazy. That's nuts. It's crazy. Yeah. You know, Ridge, they make amazing power banks, luggage, premium, everyday gear and wallets. And this year for the sixth straight year, Ridge is back with their legendary sweepstakes. And this time it's bigger than ever from July 24th through September 8th, two lucky winners will get to choose between a Lamborghini Huracan Storato, a Ford Hennessey Velociraptor, a souped up Ford Bronco, or $100,000 in cash. Y'all know I'm going with that Lambo if I have the option, but with any of those four, you can't lose. There's only 1500 Lamborghini Huracan Storatos that even exist and Ridge is giving you an offer to own one. It's a naturally aspirated V10 and has 610 horsepower. You imagine driving that thing around? And the Hennessey Velociraptor also has an insane 558 horsepower twin turbo. It's basically an American muscle car built into an all-terrain truck. Finally, the custom built Bronco is coated in scratch resistant Kevlar armor and riding high on massive 37 inch off-road tires. The best part all, you can enter completely free at ridge.com. And if you want to boost your chances, you can earn a few additional entries by picking up Ridge gear during the sweepstakes. Whether it's a power bank, wallet, luggage, or something else you've had your eye on, you'll learn extra entries with your purchase. You've heard me talk about the Ridge 2.0 wallet before. It's their most refined wallet to date and designed to pair perfectly with their new tracker card. So are you ready to upgrade your wallet and maybe even your ride? For a limited time only, head to ridge.com, link in my description below, and use code JULIANDORI at checkout for 10% off your order and a chance to win Ridge's biggest sweepstakes ever. No purchase necessary to enter, but every dollar gets you more entries. So once again, that's ridge.com, link in my description below, and use code JULIANDORI. After you purchase, they're going to ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them I sent you. You lock the hotel room door, then check it again, and maybe one more time, because even the nicest room can feel unfamiliar at night. With She's Birdie, you can bring peace of mind, with you. Just attach it to the door frame, switch it on, and if someone opens the door, BirdieBox blasts a loud siren and flashing alarm to alert you and everyone nearby. Because the best part of travel isn't worrying, it's sleeping soundly. For safer, more confident travel, visit she'sbirdie.com, that's S-H-E-S-B-I-R-D-I-E.com. the courtroom they didn't release that publicly at the time and all that we were thief and i were about to go on air for our weekend episode and about five minutes before the video of jack pasobich talking to the camera saying he just saw the whole thing i watched tyler robinson walk up line up the trigger pull the trigger do the whole bit saying it with a very straight face very good acting jack i gotta give you that but you know he goes through this and i've never liked that guy at all but thief pulled up the video and i'm like okay i i mean there were 200 people or whatever in the courtroom i don't see i don't see how he'd lie about that but i don't know is is an epstein-beiner's guy we'll play it so we played on the episode right when we get off the episode twitter's like no the prosecutor here's a video of the prosecution saying that video doesn't exist no that's not what happened there were other people in the courtroom here's what they said they saw i'm like can we even get any modicum of like truth here from anybody at this point it's just wild to me that people would be that brazen to do that um it's not though if you're trying to plant the narrative you have to have co-conspirators planning that narrative for you it's interesting to me that erica chose to take to court with her you know she was given i don't know 10 seats 15 seats whatever she could have taken family she could have taken friends she took social media influencers she took brandon tatum and jack posobic and graham allen and like that's that's how they got in oh she brought them yeah they didn't have to camp out overnight everyone else in that courtroom was either media had an allotted media slot uh a member of tyler robinson's family or had one of their slots a member of erica's family or had one of her slots or they had to camp out overnight jack posobic wasn't camping out overnight he showed up in a ferrari just ferrari pays well i guess yeah well i mean you might be able to make a living being a paid hack i don't know yeah i've never tried it here's the difference though in 1964-65 in the years after jfk tv was brand new there was no internet the government just saying shut the up this is what happened there was a lot more of an opportunity to do that now with the power of people having one of these in their hands at all times just to capture everything the idea that you could walk out of that courtroom and not think that there's going to be a million people a lot more than that as would turn out refuting what you said based on other people who were in there who can have the same power to come out there and say what they saw that's where i'm like it feels like the truman show a little bit yeah i think they feel like they have so much money and power behind them that they can just roll over and crush the little guy crush the little guy's voice so you know brandy webb billy siciliani they were both in there um those were two of the girls that came out and said we just saw a blob you know it could have been bigfoot it could have been a blob it could have been a fat chinese chinese guy it could have been tyler robinson we just don't know you can't tell um but but they don't have millions and millions of influencers they don't i mean millions and millions of followers they don't have millions and millions of dollars by hand um what tp usa has behind it is the basically the full weight of the federal government right now they are they are just a another they've become another wing of the government just like heritage foundation is they're just another heritage foundation the heritage foundation 2.0 and charlie kirk had a mission it was to take economic libertarianism to college students charlie's gone and that mission is completely gone it's gone it's completely gone all they're doing now is taking whatever they're doing now is taking whatever they're doing now they're taking whatever mainstream mainline republican talking points exist and they're just pushing it out to the boomer class that's watching fox news that's all they're doing and the question is why why do they even exist what's the point of an organization that's doing that we have organizations that do that we have fox news we have heritage foundation why do we need tpsa to do the same thing right when you talk about them being a wing of the federal government i think you make a good point there's a lot of these kind of think tank type places that'll be attached at the hip to the government over time and now it's just not going to happen you know it's just not going to happen in recent years we're able to actually see that but what about all the people in government within the federal government who are like from the left side of the aisle and don't like this current administration and would have every reason to try to subvert it why don't they subvert tp usa for example more given the fact that they don't really have any leg to stand on anymore i think you're falling into the trap of thinking there's two teams and i don't think there is it's a uniparty system there's a very narrow band of accepted thought and as long as you're in that band they're going to let you say whatever you want you can't get over here and you can't get over here but you if you're as long as you're in here we'll play like there's two teams in here we'll we'll let you put on different jerseys we'll let you go out and play games we'll let you argue over abortion we'll let you argue over tax cuts you know do you want to give a 2 tax cut to millionaires or a 1 tax cut to millionaires that's your call um and you guys can get really down and dirty and you can call each other names but don't get out here into the populist wings of the left or right stay out of that and that's why because they're on the same team they're all on the same team i think you're right about that i do agree but i gotta ask because you know it they're obviously an organization that was like associated with one candidate getting in there and i think to add to your point there as well we've seen that with like trump coming in he campaigned on x y and z and has done a b and c instead and it's kind of proven it's like if anyone was going to be kind of an outsider even though he was a billionaire it was like all right that's the guy and now he's surrounded by people that seem to be prototypical like swamp creatures and he it's his fault i mean it's his fault he had he had two terms the first term he came in he basically staffed his entire administration with people who despised him who hated him um who were on the team and so all of his populist rhetoric was was for not he wasn't able to implement any of it if he even wanted to um then he gets beaten down kicked out joe biden comes in reverses everything he stood for everything he tried to accomplish and then trump runs again and i was very skeptical uh of trump running again uh opposed him initially finally why were you skeptical because he didn't do anything the first time you know there was no border closure like he promised there was no turning the government back over to the people like he promised if you go back and listen to his original inauguration speech if he would have accomplished that I would have been the biggest supporter of Trump term two there was, but he didn't accomplish any of it. Instead, he put people, like I said, in the intelligence communities that hate his guts. He put people in the Defense Department that hate his guts. He put people in his own White House, the chief of staff that hates his guts. And then he turns around and says, ah, the whole system, I can't get anything done. Well, yeah, you put these people in here who are causing you to not be able to get anything done. And so I figured he would do the same thing in the second term. I had no idea he was going to do what he's done so far. What he's done in Trump 2.0, this second term, is the biggest betrayal of campaign promises probably in American history. I can't think of a single president who has done more to betray the people who voted for him, who put their names on the line for him, who hosted him on their programs, who campaigned for him than Donald Trump in this term. I can't think of one. I think you're right about that. We've been saying it's like opposite day. Every day with the things he'll say. I mean, even some of the lines about the war, like, no, I don't think about the average American at all. I just need Iran to not have a nuke. I mean, roll the tape from like October 2024. He's literally saying, like, you can just reverse that line, like the Eyes Wide Shut song. Like, that's what he's saying. And yet he went in and did this stuff. And you wonder because it's a good point. He surrounded himself with a lot of the wrong people in term one. Then he goes on Joe Rogan right before the election. And that was something. And he actually admitted to. He usually doesn't, like, admit to any fucking weaknesses. But he's like, I think I hired some of the wrong people. But then comes in and does it again and lets them move his red line on everything. I still there has to be something else there to me. I don't. It could be a litany of things, but there has to be something else there. Well, he took a lot of money from people who have have policy preferences that are in direct opposition to what he campaigned on. That's true. And so that that never helps you accomplish your mission. But no, he went out and hired a bunch of flawed individuals. And I'm not sure how to get around this problem. You know, if you're president, I'm not sure how to get around this problem because you've got to survive the Senate confirmation process in order to get some of these really high end appointments. And the Senate confirmation process is not going to be kind to someone they can't control. And, you know, you look at, you know, the intelligence committees. A lot of those. Those people are not going to to be kind to having a an appointment from somebody who truly is independent and actually cares about the average American. They're just not going to be. So they're not going to prove that person. I think you see it right now. I hate to hate to mention particular. Actually, I'm not going to. I think you see it right now with some appointments that that Trump has wanted to make and that have really been pushed back hard on because people in the in the Senate look and say, we can't control this guy. We're not. There's no way we're going to let this guy. So Trump immediately abandons it and then goes to to one of their people. And and those people are working against him or they're working against us. They're working against us and they're working against his campaign promise to work for us. Yeah, I think an example of one of the people that obviously got a lot of pushback back at the beginning was RFK. And I kind of wondered, like, how that did end up getting through because there was so much opposition. But then you see him come in and it becomes like. A very one dimensional focus, which I appreciate you looking at food. I'll take something over nothing. I do want to say that. But like he was going to look at a lot of different things and now he's not. So it's like you kind of box in. You're like, here's a great white shark, but he's in a little container. He can't swim in the ocean. Yeah, he's not really been able to go after vaccines. He's not really been able to go after food dyes and food colorings. He's not been able to go after anything. I mean, he is totally boxed in and he started abandoning that in the confirmation process. So you knew right then whoever was shepherding him through the process was saying, look, you're not going to get in if you say what you really believe. You're just not going to make it. And so even during the confirmation process, there was a conversation people were having, like, you think he's really changed his mind on all this stuff? Is he just saying this, but he'll get in and actually do the right thing? No, he's not. And I think he's probably a generally decent person. He really believes the things he's been saying for the last two or three decades. But you just can't play the game and keep your job. Obviously, something like this is not fixed overnight by any stretch. It's kind of a generational thing where we've built up so much decay in the system that has allowed us to get to this point where 90 year old people can hold office for 60 years and fucking keep getting paid by the same people. But if you could wave a magic wand and fix it over a 20, 30, 40 year period, how would you do that? Like the money in the system and how candidates could actually. Then do what they campaign to do. That's how I should ask it. So I gosh, I've never been asked that question. I think it starts with the judicial branch. I might be biased that way being a lawyer. But the Supreme Court is beholden to the same factors I was just telling you about with with other presidential appointees. The difference is they have a lifetime appointment so that there's a little less pressure after they get through the system. They can kind of change if they want to. But in order to survive and get on the Supreme Court, for example, you have to go through the Senate confirmation process. If you walked up there and you said, I believe Article one, Section eight is too broadly interpreted. It's the Commerce Clause. I think the Dormant Commerce Clause is a joke. Both of these doctrines need to be completely reversed. We need to take the Constitution back to the bare bones of what it was originally intended to do. Excuse me. You wouldn't survive the appointment process. And so I think we maybe. We need to radically reinterpret what advice and consent means from the Senate in order to allow the president that we elect to to have freer reign, to put the right people in those positions. The president wins. He's the one who campaigns. He's the one who goes to, in theory, all 50 states. He's the one who makes all the campaign promises. We're going to do this. We're going to do that. And then the Senate really gets to decide which of those we're even going to entertain, which of those we're even going to allow. To be, again, within that little window we're allowed to play in. If we want to broaden that window, it has to start with the court system. We, you know, we we tell our our kindergartners and our fifth graders that we have three branches of government. They're equal and they hold each other accountable. We don't. We have a tyrannical judicial system that can override anything that the Congress and the president do. They can throw out any law they want for any reason. They can make up stuff on the fly. They can add laws that don't exist. And there's nothing the Congress or the president can do about it. They're just completely beholden to the system. And so I think it starts there. But but that the fix to Congress, I think, also could fix the appointments, because if you could I mean, the fix the fix to the Supreme Court also could fix the appointments. Advice and consent should not be we're going to drill you. We're going to put you through the Clarence Thomas, Robert Bork treatment. We're going to embarrass you. We're going to research everything you've ever done. We're going to turn your life upside down. Advice and consent should really be, oh, he's been a lawyer for 30 years. Fine. Put him on. You know, we're just making sure we're not putting the dog catcher on the Supreme Court. That that's what it should be. And it's not. It's not. It's it's it's a radically different process, I think, than the founders intended. And I think it's designed to protect the system, not to protect us. When did you reach that conclusion? Was that like during your legal career or was it even earlier in law school when you were studying how it's set up? So I had I had one of the most brilliant people I've ever met was my First Amendment teacher, my. Second year of law school, her name was Susan Williams. She's a professor at Indiana. She is absolutely brilliant. We disagreed on every political topic you could imagine. She is a radical leftist. I am a pretty far of center, right? You see, just give a little smile back. He's heard me say a lot more than you have, but no, I I'm pretty I'm pretty far of right, pretty far center to the right. And I was even more so in law school and really. Oh, yeah, I was I was I was still young. I was in my early 20s. I was I was libertarian minded. You know, we don't really need rules and structures and governments. And most of this stuff should be, you know, I was kind of one of those cut the cut the federal budget by 90 percent. We'd probably be a lot better, you know, get rid of the Federal Reserve and everything will work itself out. Well, there's an argument with the Federal Reserve. That's certainly well, if it's got you, say, if you if you don't mind a 15 to 20 year economic collapse in recent years, we're going to have to do something about it. I mean, we're going to have to do something about it. We're going to have to do something about it. ridiculous that we have all of this and she said the the the supreme court doesn't tell us what the constitution says the supreme court tells us what we as a society today wish it said and it it stuck with me and it it got me rolling down that road the supreme court doesn't or the constitution first amendment doesn't tell us what to say it tells us what we as a society interpret it to say so the supreme court looks at the constitution and they say hey where are we today um well today most people kind of kind of favor gay marriage so let's read it into the constitution because we wish they said that uh the constitution doesn't say that a a second grade teacher can't can't silence the political speech of a second grader but we kind of wish it said that so let's read that into it because we as a society have evolved to a point where where we don't think second grade teachers should be silencing the political speech of second graders so why don't we go ahead and read that into it and and they do they do radical uh things to to to bind their decisions on on individuals that frankly are not in the constitution and so i remember in law school thinking there's got to be a way or at least it would be better if we could pull back this structure completely get rid of this structure and and just and just go back to the words say what they say and if the words don't bind the municipal government of toledo ohio then they don't then the toledo ohio has to figure out a way to either bind themselves or they they won't have a government oversight they won't have federal government oversight on those certain areas uh i mentioned the commerce clause earlier you know if you if you grow your own wheat in your own field and you feed your own cows with it um the federal government can stop you they can come to you and say no you can't do that they can oh yeah absolutely spring court is that's the way it's that's good law in the spring court um there's a case right on point on that um good law good law means it's it's uh it's it's not been reversed okay got it so um yeah like uh well we'll go through specific examples but there there are a lot of frankly egregious things that this country's done that are considered still good law um like the japanese internment camps those have never been reversed by the spring court those were okayed by the spring court and that's still good law what did they base that on when they okayed that so that would have been back in 1942 right after pearl harbor yeah i'm not an expert on the the koromatsu case but it's it's i know it's not been reversed i know that that right now that we probably wouldn't go that route as a society but but there's nothing in the law that says you can't um and and you know you that radicalizes a law student that radicalizes a 22 23 24 year old kid now if you're radicalizes you yeah it does it's radicalizing like that's that's the kind of thing that set me on the path to sort of this political activist mindset uh i didn't really have one prior to that i wasn't i listened to a lot of talk radio in college like while everyone else was listening to to the the coolest music out i was listening to am radio that doesn't surprise me i was kind of that guy i always want to be in talk radio i used to i used to drive down the street when callers would call in and ask a question i would turn the radio off and i would answer it as if i was the host i was practicing so you're one of those guys it's like you're not the host you're not the host you're not the host you're not the host we have to honor our commitments to the good people of iraq like you know yeah i don't know yeah i bought into all that initially um you know i remember where i was the night they started bombing uh afghanistan and iraq and uh in response to 9-11 i was um i bought into the whole thing you know it was probably six seven eight years down the road after 9-11 before i started thinking right something's wrong here i've been microdosing something new lately and it's not what you think a lot of people refer to it as nature's wine the mushroom i'm talking about is amanita muscaria you know the red one with the white spots that you've seen in every video game and folktale ever here's the thing unlike psilocybin microdosing amanita doesn't push you into a psychedelic headspace it's more of a gentle nervous system reset it calms you down without making you foggy helps you focus without the jitters and makes you sleep way deeper without the hangover a lot of people are using it as an alcohol alternative or replacement because it gives you that relaxed warm feeling without the downsides no paranoia no next day brain fog no dependency issue you can take it in smaller doses throughout the day to lock in on what you're doing and really get into that flow state i personally like taking it before i go to bed sometimes when i really need to wind down helps me get deeper sleep gives me vivid dreams and i don't wake up without any hangover and i'm ready to go the next day and the brand i trust for this is amantara they're the real deal clean sourcing no synthetics no sketchy additives and they actually educate people instead of just pushing product amantara has 500 milligram capsules and gummies beginner friendly legal and actually works so if you want to try amantara for yourself today head to www.amantara.com slash amantara slash go slash julian that link is in my description below and use discount code jdp22 at checkout for 22 off your order once again that's www.amantara.com slash go slash julian link in my description below use code jdp22 this episode sponsored by she's birdie you lock the hotel room door then check it again and maybe one more time because even the nicest room can feel unfamiliar at night that's why she's birdie created birdie box with she's birdie you can bring peace of mind with you birdie box is a portable travel door alarm for hotels dorms airbnbs and anywhere you stay away from home just attach it to the door frame switch it on and if someone opens the door birdie box blasts a loud siren and flashing alarm to alert you and everyone nearby because the best part of travel isn't worrying it's sleeping soundly birdie box from she's birdie locking in peace of mind wherever you stay for safer more confident travel visit she's birdie.com that's s-h-e-s-b-i-r-d-i-e.com in fairness to you most people did most people yeah but why i think i you know i think at the time i'll refer to what tim dillon says on this where he talks about how when things were good enough and everyone could you know buy their home go through life follow the plan live decently have their own life and live decently and live decently and live decently and live decently their family go to college the whole bit they were willing to shut their eyes more and take the propaganda and just be like yeah sounds right and then once those things started to degrade and he has a very funny rant about this it's way better explained than me but like once those things started to degrade i.e now you get to the generations we're at now whether it be gen z millennials and even gen x people started to go wait a fucking minute and to me like a line in the sand is 9-11 because look at every single there were things that happened in the build-up to that to be clear but like look at every single thing socio-economically culturally that has happened since then so would you think it was is more of the early 90s when people started waking up before 9-11 but they were willing to put up with it or do you think it was after 9-11 four or five six years later maybe maybe the housing crisis in 07-08 where people were like this this isn't working something's not right here and and what the hell happened in new york right so i wasn't alive in the early 90s so i can't really answer that part what i can say is that i do remember like as a young kid on even like on youtube i think in the early days you'd start to see six seven years later people making documentaries on like this wasn't what we were told and then to your point when the housing crisis happened and people lost their money overnight and everything they got mad and we saw the political ramifications of that you watch occupy wall street and the tea party come up at the same time populist hard left hard right whatever you want to say you know they had the same problems they had different solutions but they had the same problems and at that same point people started looking at the narratives they were fed more in my opinion i'm sure there were people looking before that but more to where they'd even look at 9-11 and events like that and be like yeah there were no wmds in iraq why do we think it was just a couple planes hitting the buildings yeah you know i i think the no wmds in iraq was a a real wake-up call you mentioned jack posobic earlier walking out with with just bold confidence saying oh i saw it i saw the i saw the gun i saw his face i saw the pull the trigger i saw him kill charlie kirk and then we you know when when people realized that he didn't i mean it's kind of a wake-up call we watched colin powell with real authority stand up there and explain why he knew there were wmds and here are the trucks that are carrying it around and here are the facilities and here's the intelligence that we have that tells us this is existing and then you know 10 years later they go in there like yeah they didn't really have anything uh i do think that was kind of a a radicalizing moment for a lot of people yeah and that goes to your point by the way it's like that didn't put people in the streets once that was like all but admitted or actually straight up admitted with some documentation as well everybody woke up and went to work yeah and and that's the key everybody keeps waking up and go to work yeah um i had a conversation with somebody yesterday and we we sort of talked about the same thing and um he asked a version of the question you asked not not really the way you did um but you know if you're trapped in the debt cycle you know you got a mortgage on your house um if you if you don't go to work the next day you can't pay your mortgage you get kicked out uh your kids play a couple of sports if you don't go to work the next day they've got to come home they can't they can't do that uh maybe you're in a decent school district and then you don't go to work the next day you you you're out of that school district and now you're moving somewhere where your kids aren't going to get as good of an education that that fiscal pressure to remain in compliance is real. It's very real, and it starts with starts with the cost of housing. It starts with the monthly mortgage stroke. And as long as you're paying a $2,000 mortgage and 1,800 of it is going to the bank and 200 is going into the house, you stay trapped in that cycle. You can't get out of it. You're basically there forever. Yeah. Yeah, we've seen that with a few different things in society. But leading up to the part where you had this professor in college who had a totally different political set of beliefs, but the way you were able to look at the First Amendment really opened your eyes. You said you were already at that point really radical libertarian. What in your childhood, what made you, outside of listening to AM radio in college, was it earlier than that where you're looking at things like the Fed and stuff like that and saying, you know what, this is all bullshit? What caused that? No, I don't think it was the Fed. It was just a philosophical underpinning that you look at history, you look at the first people that arrived in America, it was sink or swim. And what it created was the hardiest stock of people that ever lived. The hardiest stock of people. Yeah. Because in order to get here, if you were going to show up in America in the 17th century, your survival rate might be 50% for a year. You might not even survive the trip over here. Yeah, I think that's high. Yeah. And so you had to give up a life of comfort in Europe, it might not comfort by the way our current standards, but 17th century comfort. You had to give that up. You had to have some reason to want to do it, political freedom, religious freedom, whatever it is. So your philosophical idea led you to risk your life just to make a voyage that might be a couple of months. And then you show up on the shore and there's nothing, there's no safety net, there's no infrastructure, there's no roads, bridges, libraries, there's no grocery stores. You get a bow and arrow, maybe a gun. Yeah. You hunt, you fish, you farm, you figure out how to make community, you go meet some people who'll have your back when you're sleeping, and you'll have their back when they're sleeping. And you either survive or you don't. And so what we ended up with is you took the bravest people of that society, and then they came over here, and only the hardiest of the bravest survived. And so their kids were the kids of the hardiest and bravest people of, at the time, was sort of the most advanced society, which was sort of the Western European model at the time. So your first generation, your second, third, fourth generation Americans, on into the late 18th century when the revolution happens, those are a different type of people than were left in Europe at the time. That's right. They absolutely were. It's indisputable. Even the people who came here not by choice, the slaves that came over, they might not survive the journey. Oh, yeah. They came over into hellish conditions when they arrived. You know, it would have been easy to succumb. It would have been easy to quit, to give up. That meant death. So it would have been easy to die. But they didn't, and they survived. And so when they finally gained their freedom, they were the hardiest stock of people. And so the society mixed and mingled, and it, you know, obviously had its ups and downs along the way. But that was sort of the American dream. And if you look back at where I was growing up in the mid to late 90s, and you started looking around and thinking, oh, my gosh, you know, we ride it over a 3% T-tax. And now, you know, you live in California, more than half your paycheck goes to the government. Plus, then you got to pay taxes on everything you purchase. Then you got to pay taxes on when you die, you got to pay taxes so that your kids can inherit what you've already been triple taxed on. And it's that sort of a mindset. Because the answer was always, if you don't have this type of government, someone might suffer. And I'm thinking, yeah, but our whole society was built on the fact that someone might suffer. That was the great grand American experience, is that you might suffer. You probably will suffer. But if you're good enough, you're going to make it. If you're strong enough, you're going to make it. You might have to catch a few breaks. But you'll make it. You can come here, and you can make it. And by the time I was in high school, going into college, into law school, the mindset of the country had completely shifted to let's slow everything down for the absolute weakest members of society. I'm not saying the weakest members of society should be cast aside and killed. That's not the point of the story. But it was sacrificing that Americanism, is what I felt like it was. And so it was kind of a, I was predisposed to be radicalized. Let's say that. Now, what made you want to be a lawyer? I never wanted to be a lawyer. I wasn't sure what I wanted to be. I got out of college, and I got a job with the state in the Department of Revenue, the Property Tax Division. I was basically data entry. Oh, you were one of them. Yeah. Coming after it. You have a gun? Come after us for our taxes? No. Quite the opposite. I was in a cubicle under a fluorescent light with no windows, in a giant building with thousands of employees. And every Monday, all the DMVs would have mailed in all their paperwork, and I had to put it into the computer. So let me get this straight. You were. You were radicalized on the fact that they used to ride over 3% taxes, and now they're giving up half their paycheck, but then you work under fluorescent lights to find the people who aren't paying that fucking tax. Well, I was recording car taxes, but yeah. Yeah, sort of. Yeah, no. I mean, it's how easy it is to succumb to the system. Now, to be fair, I worked there seven and a half weeks, and I quit. I quit at lunch. I walked out at lunch, and I didn't go back. Not in protest. I had gone to my boss, and I was basically just doing data entry. Had a college degree, and I was doing data entry. And I went to my boss, and I said, hey, you know, the internet exists. It was in its nation form for most people. Most people weren't using it all that much. This was 2002. But I was like, hey, we got this thing called the internet. These people are putting this data into a computer. Why don't we just put a system so that when they put it in on their end, it goes into the system that I'm entering in on my end, and then I don't have to do it? He's like, well, then what will you do? And I thought, well, surely you can find some better use for my talent, my massive talent, than punching numbers on a keypad all day. And he said, well, let's just we'll think about it. Go back to your desk. And I went back, and I thought, gosh, this isn't for me. About that time, the department lawyer came by, and he noticed I was kind of underworking. He was like, hey, will you help me? I was like, sure. And so he gave me, a couple of code books. And he's like, I need to look up these code sections. And I need you to kind of tell me in these code sections, what do you think how it applies to this thing over here? And just put a Post-it note on there when you find it, and then we'll talk about it. I was like, okay. It was the best day I'd ever had to work, any job I'd ever had. Why'd you love it? It was a puzzle. I love puzzles. I grew up doing puzzles. I like playing puzzle-type games. I liked reading the. Choose Your Own Adventure-type novels when I was in fifth grade. And it was a puzzle. It was a, hey, this is what we as a society has decided how we're going to manage and structure ourselves. And these are the words we're going to use. And if you can go through and figure it out, then you can apply it over here. And it was good. It was intellectual. It was a break from just punching numbers in. Hey, this county had this much. This county had this much. It was fun. For me, it was fun. And so I did it. At the end of the day, we sat down and talked about it. And I just said, how do you become a lawyer? And he was like, well, you go to law school. I was like, all right. Duly noted. And so I thought my, I don't know, is that like a master's degree? Is it like one extra year of school? I had no idea. I knew nothing about law school. Never even considered it. So I started looking into it. And I realized it was a three-year program. And it was expensive. And it was hard to get into. And you had to take a test. And it measured your. Logical thinking capacity and your reading comprehension. I was like, I don't know. You know, this seems like a hassle. So I went and talked to my wife about it. And she was like, if you think you want to try, try. So I kind of started looking into it. And then a couple of weeks later at work, I just had enough. And I left at lunch and I just didn't go back. Married though already. And now you give up the paycheck and you're going to go to law school. Yeah, but I hadn't decided to go to law school yet. I went back and started working at a $60 tip-outs at the end of a shift and walked back into that building. I couldn't do it. I just could not do it again. I couldn't do it another afternoon, much less another day. And I had a friend who was a manager of a restaurant. And I was like, give me a job doing anything. He's like, all I got is a busboy position. I was like, I'll take it. You'd be the coolest busboy of all time today. Imagine like going to a table and listening to that Charlie Kirk shit's bullshit. Give me your plate. But anyway, so I started looking into it and I signed up for the test and I took it and I did all right. And I gave my wife a number. I was like, if I get this number on the test, I'm going to go. And, uh, and I got above that. So I applied and got in and went. Did you have kids already when you were going to school? All right. So you didn't have kids. No, we didn't have our first kid until the May or excuse me, the November after I graduated in May. Got it. And then you kept going. Hadn't stopped since. Yeah. Very good for procreation over here. Yeah, for sure. I've got, I've got eight kids, uh, but we haven't had one in five years. So the spigot may have been turned off. It's turned off now. Is that like official or just like accidental? - Oh no, it's, we've taken no action active steps to prevent anything. Okay. We're Catholic at heart. Clearly, clearly. So you go to law school, you do the three years there. And this is what was interesting. We had a chance to talk about this on the phone, but I've been talking with some friends this week, some who know you really well and know your story, others who hadn't heard of you and were looking at some of your clips, obviously, because you were going to be coming on the podcast at some point. But where did you start in your legal career? Because where you ended up is pretty wild. But where did you, what type of law did you begin with out of law school? So when you're in law school, a lot of people say, I want to go on, I want to be a criminal defense lawyer. I want to be a mergers and acquisitions lawyer. I want to, you don't really get a choice. You know, you go and you can, you take the job you can get. And that's if you want the biggest, best, highest paying job you can get. And so during your, end of your second year, you start interviewing for the big jobs. They have on-campus interviews, you apply, you do all this stuff. And the only jobs I was getting offered were basically caretakers. They were the higher paying jobs in the bigger markets. You know, I went to IU, so Cincinnati, Detroit, Indianapolis, Chicago, Midwestern type stuff. And I didn't want to do that. Like I wanted to be in a courtroom. I took a lot of trial advocacy classes. I took a lot of public speaking classes in college. I was horrible at public speaking when I first started. Horrible, horrible. I was a nervous wreck anytime I had to open my mouth, talk to somebody. Look at you now. Well, I don't have my cough button. So I'm like, Yeah, but what the fuck button? I'll hit that every time. I'll hit that every time I cough. There you go. But I wanted to be in a courtroom. And so I started applying to sort of smaller firms because I was talking to a professor and they're like, look, if you go to one of the big firms, you're just going to be carrying a briefcase. You might be reviewing depositions. You're going to be doing a lot of paperwork. You're not going to be in a court for a decade or more. So why don't you look at smaller firms? They don't pay as much, but you'll get more experience. And I found a really small firm. It had four or five lawyers. But when I interviewed, I told the guy straight up, he's like, what do you want to get out of this job? And I was like, I want to try cases. I want to be in a courtroom. He's like, I can get you a trial in 12 months. He's like, we try cases all the time. I was like, I love it. Let's do it. So I was taking depositions, you know, six or eight weeks after I got there. Solo, you know, solo. Yeah. Like that's Mrs. Tanner. This is what she's alleging happened. Review the case, go take your deposition. That's kind of nerve wracking. Six to eight weeks. Six to eight weeks into doing the job. Yeah. On the record, that's nerve wracking. I mean, smaller cases, but yeah. Still. And it was mostly car wrecks and little things like that. But it was good experience. It was good experience getting in there and figuring out how a case worked from the beginning to the end. You know, that you're actually preparing for your closing argument while you're taking your deposition. Everything's building to that closing argument, even though 95% of the cases aren't going to trial. Maybe 99% aren't going to trial. And then I tried my first case about nine months after I got there and I fell in love with it. Like I was hooked. That's all I wanted to do. What did you love about it? It was theater. It was performance. I was not a theater kid. I didn't watch a lot of movies, but something about that struck me. I remember preparing for the closing argument. The key to this whole case was this woman is lying about her injuries. And we had her on the record lying and we were going to hit her over the head with it. And it was not going to look good to the jury. And it was going to be fun. And so we're building up to that. But then it's time for the closing. And the senior partner there is like, all right, here's what you're going to do. He goes, when you get your closing done, you're going to lean out over the jury box. You're going to stick those arms wide open. He goes, and you're going to whisper, this ain't her first rodeo. He goes, that's your money line. That's the line that's going to win the jury. Write that down. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I've actually used it twice. No, no. He's a script writer. Oh, is he? Oh, dude. It's theater. Especially civil trials. They're just theater. Everything's already known. Both sides have disclosed everything. You're just going in and acting it out for a jury. And so I did it, man. I was nervous. I practiced in the conference room a hundred times. I was like, they're never going to buy this. He's like, it doesn't matter. He's like, you're going to get caught up in the moment. You're going to nail it. And so I went through my whole closing and I had my exhibits and I was this side and this side and check out line 13 of her deposition where she lied about it on stand. And then I thought, all right, here we go. And I leaned out over that jury and I put my arms out just like we'd practiced. And I was like, this ain't her first rodeo. And the jury, you know, the seats start swinging and their eyes get out. And I thought, my God, I'm hooked. Like I can't, I want to do this every day the rest of my life. Can't believe they bought that shit. Yeah. We won that case. It was five minutes. I thought they- Five minutes? Yeah. Five minutes. They didn't even get the pizza. No, no, no. They didn't even, I don't even know how they had time to elect a foreman. We, I was in the bathroom. Like they walked into the jury room. I actually have that jury verdict framed. It's in my office. It was my very first jury verdict and it was a defense verdict in our favor and I have it framed. But I walked into the bathroom and someone knocked on the door and they're like, hey, the jury's back. And I was like, oh, they must have a question, you know, because it was seriously like five minutes. And I walked in the courtroom and they came filing back in and gave a defense verdict for our client. And I thought, oh, this is easy. Law is easy. Why do people act like this is hard? And so I was hooked, man. I just wanted to try cases. And so I stayed there for, I don't know, I might want to practice in sort of the panhandle of Florida because that was sort of our area. So I went and got a, got my license in Florida as well. You have to take the bar again down there. They don't, they don't accept reciprocity in Florida, but, um, so I went and took the bar down there. And after I had a Florida license, I didn't realize this, but around town word gets around and you become more marketable. Um, so I had other firms kind of call and saying, Hey, you ever, you ever thought about doing this? You ever thought about doing that? Um, and so there was a guy that was working for a firm that, that only had really good one client. It was a, it was a large bank and he was like, and they're, I mean, they were based in the bank's headquarters and he was like, you ever thought about doing foreclosures? Yeah. And I was like, I don't know, man. What year is this? This was 2008. Hot time for that. Well, that's why they were scrambling, trying to find more foreclosure lawyers. He was like, look, we'll give you the whole state of Florida, the whole state. Yeah. He's like, just under your wing, build the whole department up. Just go, just figure it out. Cause we've got a bunch of them and we don't know what if we handle it, then give it to someone. You just foreclosing on Florida men as a job. Well, not jealous of that. So Florida has judicial foreclosures. So everything has to go to court. Okay. Um, and a lot of people knew that in 08, it was becoming very fashionable to fight them and, and delay them because you know, you're not paying a mortgage during that time. Um, and so I was there for a while and then that bank folded. That was one of the casualties of the foreclosure crisis. Um, they were very property heavy in Nevada and Texas and Georgia, which were three of the worst, worst hit states. Um, and so I saw the inevitable end coming, um, and left there and thought, Hey, if the Florida license is more valuable, I'll just move down there. So we moved to Boca Raton, Florida. I got a job at a, um, a malpractice defense, medical malpractice defense. You were a Catholic in Boca Raton. I was, uh, there were a couple of us, a needle in the haystack. There were a few of us there. Um, actually they had pretty, pretty decent Catholic churches there. Uh, several. And they had a, um, a Catholic monastery around the corner from where we live. Um, and they had an Opus Dei, uh, center, the male and female center there. And so they're ones that like whip themselves and shit, right? Uh, yeah, I'm not in it. So I don't know. That's the, that's the rumor. Uh, but it's usually a sign. You've got a pretty conservative Catholic area. Um, if, if they're present and, uh, actually went on a retreat there and it was really fascinating. Um, you can't talk about it though. No, you could talk about it. I mean, it's just spiritual lessons. I'm getting a look like a lot of rest. Yeah. Don't piss off the security guy. He gives me the wrong look and we have to leave. Um, but no, it's, um, it's, you know, that, that was sort of the evolution of my career. It was all sort of on the civil side. And while I was doing the medical malpractice defense, we had a, an HIV case. There was a kind of a long story, but a guy who got in a car wreck and he ended up HIV positive and he was trying to blame the hospital for giving him tainted blood. Well, he, he got in a wreck and it was his story. Yes. Okay. Okay. Whether we believe that, I don't know, but that was his story that no risk factors. It had to come from the hospital. Um, and so you, you, when you're doing medical malpractice defense, you have to become an expert in every area that you're working on. So if it's compartment syndrome in the thigh, you are the world's foremost expert in compartment syndrome of the thigh for the purposes of that case. Solved the puzzle. Yeah. Yeah. And so I started working on the, um, that, that case, that HIV case. And I learned a ton about HIV testing, about the history of HIV, about HIV itself, what it is, what it isn't. And, um, started talking to experts to prepare for depositions. And while I'm doing all that, there's a, um, there's a story, I think it was on MSNBC or Fox news or something, but there was this woman in central Florida who had, um, been diagnosed with HIV. She was having sex with a partner, didn't disclose it. And she was facing 30 years in prison. Cause she gave him HIV. Well, he, well, you just assumed that, he, he actually didn't seroconvert. He, he was HIV negative, but it doesn't matter. Um, it, the crime is having sex without disclosure in Florida. Uh, it, it's a patchwork of crimes across all 50 States, but each state is, has a specific statute. Um, and, and seroconversion is not a part of it in Florida. So I reached out to his lawyer. I reached out to her lawyer. I figured out who her lawyer was. And I just reached out and said, Hey, you know, this may sound weird. I do civil work. I don't do criminal work. I don't know if this will even work, but I have a defense in mind that might, I don't know if this will even work, but I, I have a defense in mind that might actually work for your girl? And he's like, tell me about it. So we we set up a time, sat down for a couple hours and talked about it. And he was like, you want to come trial with me? And I was like, sure. So we, we got an expert. We showed up to trial and the prosecution's looking at it. They have this open and shut case, right? They have a test in their hand. What, what, what more do they need? And we show up to trial and they realized they're completely unprepared. And I kind of made an offhanded comment to the prosecutor when she asked, you know, what, what, what do you want to have an expert do? And I was like, well, we're going to get them in under 702 and we're going to, here's where we're headed. And instantly they gathered and came back and like, we'll cut a deal. Wait, what's a 702? That's just a declaring someone an expert. Okay. Getting them in that, you know, different from a treating physician. Wait, why'd they, why'd they make a deal that easily? Like what were they so afraid of? Because our expert was going to challenge the diagnosis and they didn't have anybody there. They didn't even have a records custodian to bring the test in. Challenge the diagnosis that she had HIV? Yeah. So you didn't, you thought it was possible she didn't have it at all? I didn't say that. Okay. But you're saying you could argue that in a court of law that, that there's a realm of possibility that's reasonable doubt that she didn't have HIV. I didn't even say that. I felt like we had a defense that could make it impossible for them to prove it or make it very difficult for them to prove it. When you were studying HIV before this case came up, because you were looking at it in reference to the cases you were trying, what, as someone who then became an expert on it, like what do you think were the most misunderstood, publicly accepted points about HIV at the time? I think the, the number one misunderstood point that I came across was that it's easy to catch. That's She's Birdie. Just attach it to the doorframe, switch it on. Locking in peace of mind. Wherever you stay. For safer, more confident travel, visit She's Birdie.com. That's S-H-E-S-B-I-R-D-I-E.com. Wherever you stay. S-H-E-S-B-I-R-D-I-E.com. Um, the, the statistics on those studies are shocking. It is, it is a shockingly difficult thing to sexually contract. Shockingly difficult. And that's probably the most misunderstood component of it. And all of these criminal laws are based on the fact that it's easy to contract. That, that it's almost like getting shot with a gun. Like your likelihood of dying is pretty high. And, um, and that's probably the most misunderstood part of it. Hmm. So you go down, you try this case, they make a deal. She was facing, 30 years. You said they gave her like five days probation or something. Yeah. So, uh, we were getting ready to pick a jury on a Monday and they were like, look, there's a, there's an HIV education class on Friday. We will enter into a probation period for her that as soon as she finishes one of those classes, the probation will terminate. And, um, she can go to the class Friday. And so th that was it. She got, she essentially got five days probation. They went from 30 years to five days probation. Yeah. And so that's when I realized, Hey, wait a minute, we have something here. Like we, we have something we can, we can take this and market it, um, and, and get criminal clients. But that was to me a down the road thing. I wasn't something I was considering in the moment. And I, and I started getting phone calls from people because they, they saw the outcome. There were a lot of people facing similar, um, criminal charges and they were watching these other cases to see what might happen to them, what defenses they might be able to raise. And I started getting phone calls from clients and from lawyers around the country, like, Hey, how did you do this? What, what, what's the secret sauce? What's the magic. And so as I would talk to them, it was, it was illuminating, um, to, to hear their reaction. Like, this is not something they'd ever considered. This defense was not something that, that had ever crossed their mind. They were going to go in there and argue just a basic, uh, they didn't have sex or he had told her and he said, she said, and it doesn't go well for the HIV. That's right. Person. And so, uh, as we started challenging the test, we started having a lot of success initially, but then there were a lot of groups that found out we were doing it. A lot of, uh, HIV interest groups that did not like the fact that we were doing this, this defense. Why? Um, I, I can't get into their head and, and know precisely why, but the reasons articulated to me were that it was undermining the confidence of HIV testing, that it was, uh, allowing bad people to, to do bad things, um, and get away with it. Mm-hmm. Um, that it was challenging the HIV establishment. What I, one thing I did not know going into this was the HIV establishment is huge. It is. The HIV establishment. Oh, it's massive, massive. What, what do you mean? Like? Uh, the, the number of scientists whose entire jobs, um, rest on the HIV status quo. Uh, the number of virologists out in the field, the number of, of medical doctors, clinics, pharmaceutical companies, uh, professors, people in government. You have this entire structure that's designed around HIV, which is, uh, a disease that, that afflicts relatively few people compared to other diseases that don't have the same type of structure around them. You know, on a, on a per patient basis, the amount of money spent on HIV versus the amount of money spent on cancer is shocking. It's absolutely shocking. Like a lot higher. Oh, I, I don't know the numbers, the current numbers off the top of my head, but let's say it's like. $32,000 per patient versus like 600. Whoa. I don't, I don't, I don't remember the numbers off the top of my head, but in terms of research and study and everything else, I mean, it's, it's shocking. So it's a similar psychology in your mind to like creating an industry out of stopping homelessness. And then you create jobs that are fucking 300K a year that people don't want to stop. So they have no incentive to stop homelessness. And homeless, and the homeless rate stays the same. Is that what you're saying about HIV effectively with the establishment? Close, but yeah. Yeah. It wasn't Fauci, Fauci was like really involved with the early age. I had to go there. He, he was, he was. We was solving it. I, I like to tell people I hated Fauci a decade before anyone else had heard of him. So you knew all about that. Oh yeah. It was like AZT and all that. Oh yeah. Yeah. AZT was, I don't want, I'm gonna get in so much trouble. Fuck it. You're here, you're in Jersey. It's time to get in trouble. Yeah. AZT, AZT killed a lot of people. A lot of people took AZT thinking it was their, their lifeline and it just destroyed their immune systems, destroyed their livers and destroyed their life. And you found out all this when you were becoming an expert on HIV? I don't want to say expert. I, I don't, I, I, I decry that, but. Very well spoken person on the subject matter. I, I became pretty knowledgeable on it. Yes. You know, I read, read every textbook I could find on HIV, talked to every expert I could talk to, deposed or cross-examined dozens and dozens of experts on HIV. I, I never one time met a treating physician who knew anything about HIV at all. Really? Yeah. None. They, they knew nothing. They knew that there, there was a test that existed and there were a few drugs they could try. That's all they knew. They knew nothing about it. Holy shit. Most of the experts didn't know much about it. They knew, they knew almost nothing about it. They couldn't describe it. They couldn't describe the means of infection. They can't describe the cause of CD4 depletion, for example. Like they, they just, I'm thinking, what do you guys study all day? What do you do? What do you do to, to, to, to support this 30, 50, $70 billion business? Right. You guys don't know anything. I actually went back the other night and read an old deposition I did with the top HIV expert in Indiana on a criminal case I was working on in Indiana. And it was, this was more than 10 years ago. This may have been 12 years ago. And I went back and, and looked at the deposition. I read the whole thing. It was 300 and something pages. And I was awestruck at how little this woman knew. At one point in the deposition, she says, I don't even, I, maybe I'm not the expert, Danny. Maybe they need to get someone else. She kept saying, I'm not a bench scientist. I'm not a, you know, I'm not a, a treating physician. I don't know. I don't know. I'm like, well, what what do you do? So, uh, but yeah, it's this, this whole industry is, has popped up and it's, it's ferocious. It destroys people who challenge it. It absolutely choose them up and spits them out and destroys them. You seem to be a guy. And I mean, this is a compliment. You seem to be a guy that when you see anything that doesn't make sense, where an accepted narrative has just been, for lack of a better word, accepted, you want to be the dude to go stick your finger on the coffee and hold it there until it fucking starts to burn. I'm a populist at heart. Um, I don't like establishment narratives that are accepted without, without true understanding. Um, I think people, people should understand what they believe and the establishment narrative should be supported with, uh, with both fact-based evidence and a logical explanation. When you do all, I mean, you've done how many depositions in your career, hundreds, maybe thousands? Not thousands. Not thousands? Not thousands. Uh, more, more than a hundred. More than a hundred. How would you like, cause again, that one was 300 pages. So I'm trying to, that was probably hours, maybe four or five hours. It was about six or seven hours. Yeah. Okay. When you go to prepare for these things, did you have like a specific psychological way you wanted to work yourself towards questions? Or did you like to do it a little bit more free flowing, knowing that you had a full grasp of the information you were going to be asking them about? Yeah. I never had notes in front of me cause I had a strong enough mastery of the subject. That I didn't need the notes. Um, you know, I, I ordered every HIV test kit from every manufacturer, uh, memorized the, the label. Um, and so, yeah, so it didn't matter what test ultimately the person got. I was aware of, of what the test was and what its limitations were. Uh, there's always a limitation section on these test kits. Um, I knew, I knew what disclaimers they put in there in terms of all of them disclaim. Well, I shouldn't say all of them cause I haven't looked at them in years, but at the time, all of them disclaimed the ability to diagnose HIV. And that was, um, always a shock for the treating physician to learn in a deposition that they diagnose somebody based on a piece of paper that disclaimed the ability to diagnose somebody. That's fucking nuts, man. That's fucking, sometimes I do think about not to take a shot at the entire lawyer industry. It is an important industry, but like, it's so big that there's so many little things that go into it. So many people in a room, like I worked at a bank when I was out of college and I used to joke, they just put fucking a thousand lawyers in the room to argue over one line that then they'd legislate across all fucking 40,000 people at the company, including people that do nothing that has to do with that line. And sometimes I wonder if you just like took lawyers and made the population 50% overnight, if maybe we'd have a little bit more freedom and leeway and efficiency to be able to figure some things out. There are rent seeking lawyers, rent seeking lawyers. Yeah, there, there are, there are rent seeking lawyers. It's a known hazard in the community. But there are also some of the best people I've ever met are lawyers. Some of the smartest people, some of the kindest, most giving, most loving people who sacrifice their own sanity for their clients. And it's not all of them, but it's enough of them that it reflects well on the community. I'm not a lawyer who badmouths lawyers. There are bad lawyers, they're bad garbage collectors, they're bad accountants, they're bad mechanics, they're bad car dealers, they're bad everything, bad podcasters. But they're also the best people on earth in every one of those professions. And you know, just because someone deals with a bad one doesn't mean everyone's bad. That's right. And I think it's something, it's actually a theme that's infected a lot of different industries. The lawyers, the example I'm using right there, because you refer to like disclaimers on medicines that probably got put there by a lawyer. But like every industry in today's society, because we are so large of a society and there's so much shit going on, there is a level of groupthink that can infect things, I think, easier than ever before. And it's because there's now all different sectors of opinions. It's no longer like you have one and two. Now you got the internet, so you can have a thousand different groups fighting it out like they're on the last fucking chance power ride right there over one thing. And what you have now is the population gets involved in the fight. It used to be relegated to the experts and the lawyers and the business people in that industry. Now it's anybody. I mean, you can go on Facebook or X or Reddit, and any industry has citizen experts that know more than the experts in the industry. It's crazy. That's why I'm always just, I don't know if it's humorous, it's kind of tragic when people are like, "Oh, he learned on Google. Oh, he's an internet expert." I'm like, the entire world's knowledge source is there. Whatever your experts learned at Harvard, that's also available on the internet for anyone smart enough or with the desire to go look it up. Right. Like, Harvard is no longer a gateway to being smart. You don't have to go there. The entire world's knowledge base is at your fingertips. We carry it in our pocket. And yeah, there's a lot of crap. There's a lot of crap on the internet. There's a lot of bad information on the internet, but there's a lot of good stuff on there. Oh, sure. Yeah. It's a mix. I think there's something to be said for that as well, because I think it cuts both ways, too. I think you'll have expert class who just poo-poo everyone's opinion when in fact they may actually be more informed at this point based on accessing the world's full information. And then you'll also have some people sometimes, to your point, that will use the internet the wrong way and go all the way on things and have complete confirmation bias on every single thing they ever look at, such that they think they're an expert. Yeah. And they're really not. But there's got to be some sort of, in this brave new world we got, there's got to be some sort of balance made there to where the expert class and the internet class can actually have conversations where they're trying to seek a solution. I think there's no better example right now than like the Charlie Kirk case where you have that, which we'll get to in a minute. But before you got to doing what you do now with the full streaming on the case, which of course I want to talk about, you did these HIV cases for a lot of years, and then there was another type of law you did between then? Yeah. So the HIV industry sort of burned itself out, the HIV criminal defense industry. So there's the 50 states, but there's also the military side. And the military side we were particularly active in. The military side? Yeah. So the military had a lot of HIV people charged with that crime. And we sort of legislated ourselves out of that because there was a case that went all the way to the CAF, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, that reversed the Armed Forces' ability to enforce the law. So that's the way they were charging people with HIV. And that sort of instantly overnight dried up most of the HIV cases out of the military. And by that time, there was a group that was led by a professor, I can't remember where he was, out of Massachusetts or Connecticut, somewhere in the Northeast. And he started showing up with his little minions at all of our cases, and he would get the prosecutors prepped for our defense and help them get in touch with their own experts and all that. He's not a bad guy. He just, you know, he's a good guy. He's a good guy. He's a good guy. He was part of the HIV establishment. He wanted to see it perpetuated. And so it just became time to move on. You know, I'd done it for four or five years. It was plenty fun. It was a lot of travel because these cases last weeks. And we were trying, you know, if you try a case a month even, you're gone two, three, four weeks a month. That's hard with a young family too. Yeah. And my fifth kid was born while, right after I got back from a trial. And I just thought, you know, this isn't right for me. Like, this isn't right for my wife. This isn't right for my kids. I need to do something else. So I went into broadcasting for a little bit, opened a consulting shop with a buddy of mine and rounded up some clients and started a talk radio show and did that for some reason. You started a talk radio show? Yeah. News and views from 9:00 to noon. We didn't talk about that on the phone call. You didn't ask. So you were doing it. Well, because you kind of skipped that part. You said, "I was doing the HIV law." And then I went to. I got a general counsel job. Like you skipped the middle of that. So you were doing. You went back to scratch the itch and you went to the original College Barons love of AM radio. I did. I always wanted to try it. And. Obviously, you're good at it. Well, I had an opening in my life. And I knew somebody that worked at the station and we were talking and he was like, "Look, we've got an open spot from 9:00 to noon. No one's ever made talk radio in this market work in that time period. So just do it." understand you'll probably fail it won't be any good challenge accepted um he said we're running laura ingram there right now just on a you know just grabbing her from satellite but if you want it you can have it and i was like let's do it um and so i started and i was a nervous wreck my early shows are terrible i still have them uh recorded somewhere and i've gone back and listened to them occasionally they were awful we got to find the baron files no you don't don't go looking we're digging don't look um digging amanda let's get on it make a note she'll never find them she'll find them uh i mean they're out there but i uh so i did that for a while i did that for several years um nine to noon every day put a show together in the afternoons and evenings got up in the morning um went to the station put my final touches on the notes and did a show every day and i was still practicing law in the afternoon just on a private basis but not not super busy i was mostly focused on the radio where are you living at this point uh montgomery alabama montgomery alabama um wacv it was a it was a fun little job um and um and then that sort of ran its course i did that four or five years and i was like so then i tried another market i went into over to Auburn and was driving over there every day to do a radio show. Uh, and I was working in house for a guy and that's kind of where I got the in-house bug. I was, I was, he owned the radio station. He was like, I can't pay you much on radio, but I've got this in-house position. If you want to come by the office for a few hours a day, he was doing commercial real estate. And so I went over to him and then COVID happened and I was working for him doing a little local radio show in Auburn. And that was, it was a great show. I thought it was a lot of fun. And, um, but when COVID hit the commercial real estate business just collapsed and he was, you know, he probably didn't need to be paying a lawyer to sit in his office every day, uh, with the way that was happening. And so I started looking around like, what else can I do? And that's when I, um, I went to work for, um, a defense contractor, but it was like an IT type of job. Uh, buddy of mine was the, the manager of operations over there and he brought me in and it was, uh, it was a lot of fun. So I was there for a little while. Um, it was kind of a hybrid work from home position, particularly during the COVID era. Certainly no like trial law at this point. No, no specific paperwork, looking at deals, um, finding deals, uh, bidding on deals, you know, it was just a lot of fun. It was, it was, it opened my eyes to the world of government contracting that I didn't know existed. And so I did that for a little while and I ran into a buddy of mine at a high school football game and they were hiring a lawyer at a healthcare department. And I was like, well, at a healthcare data analytics firm and, uh, it seemed like a cool opportunity. I really liked him. I had a lot of respect for him and always had, I'd known him since high school. I'd known of him since high school. And so, um, I went to work for him and, um, stayed there for four or five years. And then that sort of ran its course. No, uh, no, but then that's when I started doing the podcast, um, and on, on the Charlie Kirk stuff and it started taking off a little bit. You had said you were doing a little bit, the podcast, like on the side doing other things. And then this happened and you kind of went full bore into that. Yeah. Where were you on September 10th when Charlie was, I was sitting at my desk where I podcast every day. I was sitting at that desk. Um, I was, uh, working, uh, for the healthcare data analytics company, but I was working from home that day. And, uh, got a call from a buddy of mine who's a longtime political operator. And he was like, you know, Charlie Kirk got shot. I was like, what? He was like, dude, you know, I'm not going to do that. And I was like, I'm not going Yeah. And I thought, no. So I jumped on the internet. Like all I could see was the headlines at the time because it was too early. The videos hadn't started coming out. The pictures weren't coming out. So you were right on it. Yeah, it was, it was pretty quick. I mean, I don't, I don't want to say a minute to the minute how many minutes it was, but it was pretty quick. It was before the videos and the pictures started dropping. And then the first video that dropped was that kind of distant video. And it looked like he got shot in the chest because his shirt jumped. And I, and we were still on the phone. I was like, man, it looked like he got shot in the chest. He was like, yeah, I don't know. He's like, I just heard he got shot and he may not make it. I was like, what? How? I was like, you know, maybe it winged him on the shoulder. Kind of, you know, you could see the shirt jump on the side and I kept rewinding it and looking. I was like, dude, I'm telling you, it looks like it hit him in the chest. You know, he might be all right. And so we were guessing, you know, what kind of person would do it? Would it be a radical leftist? Would it be some, you know, a person who's opposed to the bombing of Iran in June? You know, who could it be? And while we're doing that, then the up-close video got released. And I came across that and I just, I just gasped in horror. And he was like, what? And I said, don't watch it. And I actually talked to him about a month ago. He said he's never watched it. Someone who knew Charlie and had, you know, been around the block a long time. And I was like, don't watch it. I was like, it's so ghastly. He was like, describe it. I was like, his neck exploded. He was like, how? I said, it looked like I got shot in the neck. I said, but I said, I've never seen that much blood. Come out of a small, a small spot in one, in one time in my life. I didn't know it was possible. He's like, was it like squirting? I was like, no, it was like someone opened the bottom of a gallon jug and it just fell out of the side of his neck. Yeah. And, um, and so we stayed on the phone for a while and I kept looking up information and I think we were still on the phone when he was, when the rumors first started breaking about an hour later that he had died. Um, I mean, once you saw it, didn't you, once you saw that video, didn't you think? Yeah. I kept telling him that I didn't think it was possible that he lived. You know, I, I just said, I don't see how you live after, after that. Even if it's just from blood, even if it's not from trauma, just from blood loss itself. That was so much blood. Um, that's where I was. I was sitting at that desk, uh, looking at a monitor in the position where my camera is now. Monitors moved over since, but yeah. Now, were you thinking anything at the time or was it just pretty much like all of us were just shocked that this happened? When I say thinking anything at the time, were you already wondering like, Oh, no, I wasn't skeptical yet. Um, my major thought was the security of people I knew who, who kind of not, not as public, obviously as Charlie, but people who, who did the podcast circuit, the speech circuit, you know, who, who were out in public, who were at rallies, like this is the guy I was talking to was one of those types of people. And I just said, you know, don't, I wouldn't go in public for a while. He's like, I'm not. And he was talking to other people at the same time. And he was like, everybody's saying everybody's locking down. Nobody's going anywhere right now until we figure out what's going on. And, um, I think that was the natural reaction was just fear. It was just a fear of what, what the hell, like, this is really brazen. Yeah. The idea that, you know, especially in America, someone would ever be killed by anyone, regardless of who actually ended up doing it or was behind it and whatever. The idea that, that someone would be killed on the basis of their political beliefs, which unfortunately has happened many times before is just, it's still insane to me. It's insane to me that in, in this case, in 2025, something like that could happen. It could happen. So publicly could happen where there's thousands of people right there in the iPhone era where everyone's got their camera out and, you know, people are going to be able to see this forever. You think about that guy, he had, Charlie Kirk had kids. They're going to grow up one day and chances are they're going to see that video. And it's like, that still doesn't register for me that that's like a thing today. Yeah. Speaking of that, I mean, it was, it was odd that there was so little footage that came out. You know, I think thousands of college students gathered anywhere. People trapped. Four angles, four. Something. I mean, it was just maybe six total, I think, that have been released. Maybe only four. Not including the back camera. I'm talking about just iPhones. Yeah. I think you have four or five, six cameras at most, including the UVU review camera angle where they, the school itself was filming. But it's, it was just a shocking moment. Um, I was not the biggest Charlie Kirk fan. Uh, I wouldn't say I was opposed to Charlie. I never spoke out against him. I didn't like have a visceral reaction to hearing his name, but I always thought he was, was, was on the team. You know what I mean? Like in the middle on the unit party, he, he had started kind of speaking up on the, the Israel issue a little bit towards the end of his, end of his life. But prior to that, I mean, he was, he was just sort of a water carrier for whatever mainstream Republican, uh, thought was at the time. And that's, that's not really my brand of politics. And so I, I, I always sort of viewed him that way. I also had a friend one time tell me this was before he died, how much money they thought he was making. And I was just shocked. Like it, it floored me when I heard the figures that were coming out, um, that he was saying. Are you able to say that? Like what he was estimating? Yeah. I mean, he was saying 25 to 50 million a year. He thought he was pulling in, uh, which, which he asked me, what do you think he's making? Cause he had just heard somebody that supposedly knew. Um, and this was probably six months before he died. And, uh, I said, I don't know. I bet he's making two to 5 million. He's like, I think it's like 25 to 50. And I was like, what, how? I was like, how? He was like, how, Deef? Yeah. What are we doing wrong? He's like, he's got the podcast. He's got his salary from the place. He does real estate deals. He's involved in private equity. He's a bestselling author. He's like, man, all that money adds up. Yeah. He's got a few other lines of income. Didn't think of that. Yeah. He wasn't all in on one, one line. He's a sharp guy. He was a sharp guy for sure. He's a very sharp guy. Um, even those who disagreed with him, like I disagreed with him on a lot of issues. Never one time felt like he was a dishonest actor, um, or like a sellout or a bad guy. Necessarily, maybe a sellout a little bit, but not a bad person. Like I never thought he was secretly in the mob out killing people. You know, I just, I just thought, you know, this is a guy who figured out how to play politics at a very high level, uh, on a team that I'm not on. Um, and so that was kind of my, my thought on Charlie, but you know, as we were, as we were talking about it, the, the fear was sort of the overriding, um, thing in the moment was just a, a really terrifying that a guy could really just get shot in the neck. We were actually talking about, do you think it was, you know, a leftist or that? And I kept looking at the video and I was like, I hate to sound gruesome and I hate to like do gunshot analysis in the moment. I said, but I think the shooter was left-handed. And he was like, why? I was like, because I bet you he was aiming for his mouth or his nose. And it was kind of down to the left. And your first shot on the range is usually down to the other side. Um, I was like, I bet you, he, he got a little anxious on the pole, you know, and, uh, so, I mean, that's kind of the, the thought process. We were just sort of working through it from the very basics. There was no thought of really who was responsible or, or some grand conspiracy or some, you know, multi-agency coverup in the moment. It was just sort of like, what kind of crazy person would do this? Right. Yeah. When did you do the first podcast discussing it at all? Was that a day later or two days later? I think it was like a, he died on a Wednesday. I think it was Sunday. Okay. Now that was, so Tyler Robinson was arrested at, well, they tell us he was arrested sometime on Thursday evening. And then it was announced, I think Trump announced it that Friday morning, two days after the killing on Fox and Friends, like, yeah, we got the guy, whatever, nothing to see here. And so Sunday would have been a couple of days after that. At this point, were there parts of the story that you were already like, wait a minute, this isn't, this isn't clicking. Yeah. So I, I had a, when I was doing a consulting job a long time ago, this was, I don't know, a decade before Charlie died. We were doing some consulting on a team for a grocery chain. And one of the components of the consulting gig was, was Google trends analysis. And so we would look at, you know, what kind of, what kind of trends are, are mid thirties women looking at when they go to the grocery store? You know, what, what's the cool new hip snack? What, what's everybody looking for? And so I had, I had used that in the past because I recognized the power of that analysis to realize these are real searches. Like these are actual searches that people are doing. This isn't just Google telling us what they think people are looking for. It's taking a sampling. It's not every search ever run on Google, but it's taking a sampling and they won't, you know, the special sauce, they won't tell you how many are in the sample or what percentage it is. But you can be sure that if, if someone in Lincoln, Nebraska searched for the Atlanta Braves on June 3rd of 2025, that that search took place. Somebody there, did that or somebody with an IP address originating from there made that search. And so I had, I had thought while I was doing this stuff with the grocery store, I kind of thought, wouldn't it be interesting if we could look at sort of mass shootings and things like that? There's always this, oh, he's a, it was planned. He's a Patsy or whatever. And so I started looking up mass shooters as they would happen or high profile crimes as they would happen and look and see, were these terms, were these terms, were these terms, were these terms search? Was this guy's full name search anywhere? It shouldn't have been. And so I, I, I did it with different things. And I talked to a guy I was working with at the time, and we were talking about the Thomas Matthew Crooks and I'd done this, the search with him and I, you know, he pops up in Washington, DC the week before he pops up over interesting. Yeah. And so, and again, why is he popping up there now? Do I know it's that Thomas Matthew Crooks they're looking for? No, it could be any Thomas Matthew Crooks, but if you put it in quote, you know, it was searched in the order. Um, and you then can look and say, well, he wasn't searched in Virginia. He wasn't searched in West Virginia, but he was searched in DC or he was searched in Maryland, or he was searched in New York. And, um, so you can't say who's doing the search. You can't say why they were doing the search. You can't say that it was definitely that Thomas Matthew Crooks, but I started doing it for all these things. And it was always really interesting to me. And I was sort of in my mind had created this, uh, fake mass shooting or real mass shooting, fake school shooting or real school shooting based on these searches. And so after the Charlie Kirk shooting a day or two later, the guy was like, have you done it with that guy that got arrested? Uh, Tyler Robinson. I was like, no, he's like, you should. So I did, I started looking at Tyler James Robinson, Tyler Robinson. Um, I looked in Utah, Arizona, Washington, DC. Um, I always found that you get an interesting hit in the Northern district of Alabama around Huntsville because the FBI was there. Um, a few of those things in Huntsville too. And so I started looking at all of the names associated with the case, Lance twigs, Tyler Robinson. And I started seeing this really weird things. And I was talking to a buddy of mine. Um, and I was like, what do we do with this? And I was like, I should get this to podcasters. And so I, I would, I would take the screen caps and I would email it to Ian Carroll, email it to Candace Owens. Now that I'm on the receiving end of those emails, I realized how insane that email had to sound insane. I'm so terrified of going back and even reading it. Cause I don't want to see myself in that light because I get these emails now, you know, from people with, with the yarn boards behind them, you know? Yeah, we get a few. And, um, but I was trying to get the information out to someone else. I didn't want to cover it. Cause I felt like, you know, it sounds dangerous because Israel was a country that kept pumping up in these searches. And, um, and so finally no one would bite on it. No one would email me back. And I was like, you know, to hell with it. We'll just do it ourselves. So I fired up the camera one night and just went over it. And, and like my normal 35 people watching, maybe 50, um, not a lot of people were watching, uh, your humble host at the time. And, um, and so I, you know, do my show, turn the camera off at the end. Didn't think much about it. Went to bed a week later, you know, I did another show the next Sunday night because I'd looked and I'd, I found out the name of the surgeons at Timpanogos hospital. And so I looked all them up and I found the name of the lawyers that were involved. So I looked them up and I started seeing these really weird patterns that why is someone in Israel searching seven surgeons that work at Timpanogos hospital in June and July of 2025? Like why? Yeah, it's really weird. And you can't tell me the searches didn't take place. They did. Um, it's possible. Somebody in West Virginia had an out of Washington, DC and they were coming out of, uh, other places they shouldn't have been. Like I could see someone in Utah saying, I need surgery at Timpanogos. Who are the surgeons? And looking them all up. I can't see someone in Washington, DC doing that. I can't see someone in Israel doing that. It didn't make sense to me. So I went and covered that. And then as we would learn more and more information about the case, I would always do this Google trends analysis. So I ended up doing like six or eight weeks worth of shows on just Google trends. I didn't, I covered no other aspect of the case really. And then there were a couple other mass shootings that popped up along the way and I would cover those as well. Um, there was one in North Carolina, a guy shot up a bar and I looked his name up and I was like, this looks like a fake mass shooting and here's why. And then there was a guy who, uh, went after a Mormon church or something in Michigan at the time. And I was like, I think that might be real because I can find no evidence anyone was looking for this guy. Um, but I just, it was going through these different things. Um, and I'm a, you know, I'm a consumer of live podcasting. And so Ian Carroll was doing free speech Friday. My wife said, Oh, I got to get gas. I got to go somewhere in the morning. So, um, I'm going to go get gas. And I was like, well, let me go get gas. I'm just going to watch a podcast anyway. So I put the podcast up on the dash of the minivan and I'm driving to Kroger to get gas and Ian Carroll comes on and my, I'm all excited because I know what I'm doing for the next couple of hours. And I always look forward to that show. I loved it. And, uh, he's like, man, we got something interesting tonight. We've got this guy, this new podcaster. He's got like no subscriptions. No one's ever heard of this guy. He's like, he's doing great work. And I was like, hell yeah. Who is this guy? I cannot wait. Put me on someone new. This is great. I'm tired of listening to the same people. And, um, and he was like, his name is Baron Coleman. And I was like, Oh no, I was like this. I did not need this. Um, and so I called my wife and I was like, turn Ian on, uh, this is, this could, this could be weird. Um, and so then I get home that night and I've got, you know, hundreds of emails of people. Like, you know, Hey, I found you online. I'm like, Oh gosh, you know, I've taken no steps to protect myself in any way, really. Um, and it just sort of took off from there. You know, I had 300 and something subs and it went to a thousand and it was, I remember being on a plane with my sister, uh, going to my niece's wedding. And, and I looked and I was like, I got 3000 subs. I was like, I never thought I had 3000 people watching my show. That's crazy. And, uh, and then I went back and looked at the old episodes. They had like 20, 30,000 views. I'm like, who the hell is watching this? You know, why would anyone, tune me in? You shout out by Ian. Yeah. It made a huge difference. And so it, it just sort of took off from there. And I didn't want to be pigeonholed as the Google trends guy. And I felt like that had kind of run its course. And I felt like I, you know, was, was a decent enough broadcaster that cover other stuff. And if people were interested at all in the Google trend stuff, maybe they'd stick around to hear me cover, cover other stuff too. So I started looking at other aspects of the I got interested in them before we get to that on the Google trends thing. This is just something I always wonder. Cause it's kind of wild when you look after something crazy happens and then you'll see, like, as you said, the full name with the middle name searched in places. And I I'm always like trying to put myself in the seat of people, part of like a conspiracy to do this. And I'm like, yeah, human beings, even ones that are supposed to be smart in dark positions, they make stupid mistakes. But why in so many instances, do you think people actually like take the time on Google without doing anything? Maybe they put a VPN on, maybe they do that, but like, don't you think they could get like an Edward Snowden NSA computer so that it's not through fucking Google that they're searching for a guy, or maybe just don't search for the guy that's going to be a middle of your conspiracy altogether. Like why do they do this shit and leave a trail other than to make sure someone smart like Baron Coleman catches it because they want you to? I don't think most people knew this tool existed. I had to introduce people to the tool. Most people had never heard of it. Really? Yeah. Most people did. I mean, most of the people watching the show had never heard of it, had no idea that the capacity of it or how powerful it is. powerful of a tool it was, or what it was even doing. Yeah, it's been around a while. Yeah, it's been around since 04, I think. It's been around a long time. But that ambiguity or that lack of knowledge, or maybe just ignorance in its classical sense, that ignorance of Google Trends allowed people to attack the tool, or attack the use of the tool in the Tyler Robinson case. Because people were like, oh, that's not what Google Trends is. You can't identify a single search. Well, no, you can. You know, if that search shows up, that search was done. It was done. It absolutely happened. And so it's, you know, I think part of it is people just didn't realize it existed. I do see now that these searches are not being run on a lot of these mass shootings. It used to be almost all of them. Almost all of the mass shootings, you could find the shooter searched in particular jurisdictions in advance, three to six months in advance, and then again a month in advance, and again a week in advance, a lot of times a day or two before. It's so strange. Yeah. It's just wild. And there's some that you couldn't, like the shooter down at Parkland in Florida. Nicholas Cruz? I think that was his name. I could find nothing on that guy. And that was a kind of a weird situation there. Like, that's one I expected to find a lot on. I found nothing. There's no lights in that kid's eyes. Nothing home there. He went and got a Coke at a subway and just, like, chilled out. Yeah. Like, that's. That's a different type of. Different type of person. Yeah. Yeah, no lights. That's a good way to describe it. But anyway, yeah, I mean, that was kind of the limitation of the Google Trends is just that people weren't familiar with it. But because people weren't familiar with it, I think it had value because people were just Googling names. They're like, oh, we're using a guy named Thomas Matthew Crooks. Let's look him up. Let's check. Does he have a social media profile? You know, what's he look? Is there a picture online? What are they going to see when they Google his name after this happens? I don't know that that's what was happening. I can't say definitively that's what's happening. But in the absence of hard knowledge, the mind kind of runs wild on these things. Now, the first few weeks when you're doing that and focusing on the show with the Google Trends, though, there's a lot of information coming out from the government fast and furiously about, you know, what they are saying happened here. This is what it is. This is, oh, there were texts with Tyler Robinson, his alleged lover, by the way. His lover was trans. There's that angle here. He wrote this stuff on the bullets. What was standing? What was standing out to you, again, outside the trends right away that you're like, what the fuck? That doesn't make sense. Like from the jump. It's hard to it's hard to to dissociate the Google Trends analysis I was doing because the Lance Twigs thing was always suspect because Lance Twigs was a far more persistent result on Google Trends for a much longer period of time than Tyler James Robinson was. Really? Yeah. Overseas and in districts. District of Columbia. He would pop up from time to time going back to when he was a teenager, 16, 17 years old. You would you would see him with his full name, Lance Tyler Twigs and Lance Twigs. How old was he now in 2025? I don't know. Twenty two, maybe three. So so several years. Yeah. Like twenty, twenty one, twenty two. It starts popping up. Interesting. And my thought in this is, you know, how do you become a patsy? I think I think there are hundreds of thousands of available patsies. At any given moment, probably because people are looking up stuff online. They shouldn't be looking up. They're saying things in discord chats. They shouldn't be saying they're trying to meet up with people. They shouldn't be meeting up with primarily young people. And so you end up with this pool of available people that any one of them would rather go to prison for accessory to a murder than what they're what they're trying to do online. And so it's hard to to say. You know, I don't want to segregate those two things in my mind. It's hard to take the story of Tyler Robinson that we're being fed without the Lance Twigs component being this persistent showing up, looking to me like a federal operator or at least an asset of some sort from the very beginning, from his from his late teenage years. And, you know, then the stories come out that his parents were having a lot of problems with him and, you know, his grandparents were having problems with him and, you know, Twigs, Twigs. Yeah. And so it looks like you have a problem child who's chronically online, who's. Obviously sexually disturbed. God knows what his Internet search history look like. God knows what kind of discord groups and Reddit pages he was looking at and all kinds of other stuff. A guy like that is ripe, you know, to we can offer you a way out of this. And so I sort of always took it from that perspective. That's sort of what made me starting to that's what made me start to be skeptical of the whole story from the beginning is the Lance Twigs component, not the Tyler Robinson component. That's interesting. So you were pulling on to that more. Was there a thought there early on where you're like, damn, I wonder if Tyler Robinson even did this all together? Yes, I was willing to accept he did it initially. I kind of took it at face value. Why did you take it at face value? Yeah, thank you. I have a mute. I don't know if you've ever watched me. I cough a lot. Yeah, I've seen you do it. It's just part of me. So I have. I have a mute button that I've installed and I use it a lot. But. I was willing to accept Tyler did it, but I was willing to accept he was set up to do it, set up like like he was not brainwashed, but but pushed, radicalized, not nudged. You know, we got to do something. He's coming on campus. You know, this is our chance. You're the guy you you know, you've got the gun. You know how to shoot that kind of thing. I kind of always associate I associated Lance Twiggs with a set up from the beginning and I associated Lance Twiggs with a kind of an asset aspect from the beginning. And so it was easy for me to see kind of that two steps to Tyler Robinson. It wasn't until I sort of got fascinated with watching people try to recreate the shot, a 30 out six shot, and they were shooting absolutely everything. And, you know, Green Beret podcasters and sniper podcasters saying this is not a 30 out six. It had to hit body armor. It had to have hit something else. It had to be a lower caliber round. It had to come from a different direction. There's no way a 30 out six from that direction did this damage. It's impossible. And that's sort of what led me to, well, maybe there was something else. Maybe there was another person. Maybe it was some, you know, Chris Martinson had that theory that he was shot with a lower caliber round from a different angle. And so I sort of ran down that rabbit hole for a while. Did Chris have a like have someone in the crowd that he could point to on that? Or was he was he just basing it off what he could see ballistically? No, he didn't. I don't think he ever pointed anyone in the crowd. I think he was thinking Sorensen center roof. Okay. Because that's the right angle to to do the damage that was claimed. So that's a different roof than the one that Tyler was allegedly on. Yeah. So the low center is pretty straight ahead. You know, maybe offset a degree or two. I think it was nine degrees offset. The low center roof is kind of to Charlie's. I don't know. Ten o'clock. No, not ten o'clock. What is that? Whatever that is over there. Ten o'clock. And that would be more of an angle because remember, Andrew Kovac came out with that tweet allegedly. Oh, yeah. Quoting the doctor saying that his. Can we pull that tweet up, D, if I love that one? His C1 through C6 were impacted. It's a miracle. Yeah. And so Martinson, I think, is trying to to reconcile damage to the vertebrae with with angle of a gun. The angle a gun would have had to come from in order to do that damage. And so he was sort of leaning towards the low C center. I was still thinking gunshot at the time. I mean, you know, this was late September, early October. But I was I was sort of on the gunshot train, but not a 30 out six from the low C center again, because all the ballistic experts, they were shooting thousands of things. I mean, they were shooting steel plates and cast iron skillets and stop signs. And they were shooting ham bones and ham hocks and necks and pigs and cows. I mean, they were shooting everything. And it was just blowing right through everything. And they were shooting it from one hundred and forty two yards. And it would just blow through everything. And it would blow through the concrete block after it blew through everything. And so it never made sense to me that a bullet could arrive from the low C center at that angle, a 30 out six round with that much energy and and stop in his neck within like, what, three inches. Right. And you've just pulled up the tweet. This was from, I believe, September 20th, 2025, 10 days after the one you referenced with Andrew Colvett. And I when I did the podcast with Joseph Scott Morgan, like we read this one out, too, because even if somehow this were true and to be clear, I don't believe this. It's like the fact that he wrote this whole thing out, presumably read it back to himself because the grammar looks good. So it seems like he edited it. And I don't know if he did the old rule my mom used to say, which is count to five before you press send. But like the fact that he pressed send on this in a nation that was once told that a magic bullet went through fucking 40 different regions to somehow kill the president. United. States and thought this was not going to be taken the wrong way. Blows my mind from like a just intellectual discourse level. But just to read it for people to have context so you understand what we were referring to. This was Andrew Colvett on September 20th, 2025. He says, I want to address some of the discussion about the lack of an exit wound with Charlie. I'm usually not interested in delving into the most of this kind of most of this kind of online chatter. And I apologize. This is somewhat graphic. But in this case, the fact that there wasn't an exit wound is probably another miracle. And I want people to know. I just spoke with the. who worked on Charlie in the hospital. It's interesting from a HIPAA standpoint, but that's new. to here nor there he said the bullet quote absolutely should have gone through which is very very normal for a high powered high velocity round i've seen wounds from this caliber many times and they always just go through everything this would have taken a moose or two down an elk etc unquote but it didn't go through charlie's body stopped it i mentioned to his doctor that there were dozens of staff students and special guests standing directly behind charlie on the on the other side of the tent and he replied quote it was an absolute miracle that someone else didn't get hit unquote quote his bone was so healthy and the density was so impressive that he's like the man of steel it should have just gone through and through it likely would have killed those standing behind him too unquote in the end the coroner did find the bullet just beneath the skin even in death charlie managed to save the lives of those around him remarkable miraculous well and i agree with him it would have taken a miracle like there's there's he he even admits again taking this at face value which i don't take anything he says at face value uh but if you take that at face value the surgeon comes right out and says hey this doesn't happen this at 30 out six doesn't stop in that little bit of soft net soft tissue in the neck it just doesn't happen that's not a thing that happens it's a miracle that it did um and so even that you look at that and you say okay it wasn't a 30 out six to the neck it couldn't have been it would have gone through would it matter so what was the gun used here again in mauser is that right yeah so when you're seeing all these different demonstrations from berets and and snipers and stuff like that who are doing this like like qualified guys who are doing it online were you seeing it with people using all different kinds of guns including the gun or a similar one that was used here yeah they were using everything down to uh you know 223 up to uh 30 out six and you know nobody knew at the time was it a frangible round was it uh you know 150 170 grain was it 180 grain nobody knew what it was but they were committed to the 30 out six narrative and it doesn't matter what you put in a 30 out six it's going through i mean jesse on fire and heavy duty country did a a demo with frangible rounds these are frangible rounds from like the 1940s can you explain that to people who don't understand guns and bullets out there yeah so so a regular full metal jacket round is designed not to break up it's supposed to go through a frangible round is designed to break up it's it it stops redirection it stops um people you know innocent bystanders from getting hit and so it's um it it will turn kind of to dust if it hits the right uh right density of an object but can it like mushroom too and like um so that you're thinking of kind of a a soft point that will that will sort of mushroom when it hits um but no i mean a frangible round typically is not going to mushroom okay um full metal jacket can have a little mushroom mushrooming but it's not designed really to do that um but yeah i mean it didn't matter what they threw at it anything they fired went through much thicker things than a neck much denser bone than vertebrae and so you know instantly i began to doubt that narrative and i'm thinking okay if it wasn't a 30 out six and it wasn't from the low c center where would it come from it had to had to be a gunshot right where did this gunshot come from and so i sort of ran down that rabbit hole for a while before you realize that rabbit hole doesn't hold much weight either um because even a lot of the lower caliber rounds are going to to pass right through that i mean it's just a neck is not that much tissue it's soft you know um as you're thinking about this at this point where's your head going with what this was did you have any idea of like in your opinion what this could be or who might be behind it or things like that or was it too early no it wasn't too early at all because again the lance twigs component made me think there might be some sort of government aspect to it i i couldn't at the time think of why the government would want to kill charlie kirk that didn't make sense to me he'd been a huge friend of the president you know rightly or wrongly credited with getting the president re-elected he was friends with the president's son he was uh you know business partners with the president's son and so in my mind i'm thinking okay if this is a government or if this is a government or if this is a government operation it has to be rogue it has to be something that that is operating below the office of the president but at a high enough level that you could actually pull this off you're not going to get like a bunch of e5s out there like let's kill charlie kirk you know and run and do something so you know that's sort of where my mind was was this was probably a domestic military operation but below the office of the president did you have a motive in in mind or like a reason they would want charlie kirk gone the iran war that was why yeah i mean that's the only thing i could think of he was he was pretty adamant and a lot of the clips were starting to get replayed the the clip from the pbd podcast back in 2023 i remember that when it came out yeah that was pretty devastating that was like i would cite that to people at the time when i'm like charlie kirk was saying yes i'm like this is most fucking you know pro israel kind of dude ever saying this like five days after october 7th where he was talking about the i've been to that cause of border you know i don't know how it wasn't only that though he seemed to have insider knowledge of the plan uh looking back because he said you know i i don't even want to use the word he said okay i'll use it they're gonna ethnically cleanse it you know and at the time i thought how can you ethnically cleanse gaza that's crazy you'd have to either kill everyone or relocate her i mean that didn't even make sense but looking back you go oh maybe he did know something and maybe that knowledge as he continued to turn and push harder on that subject maybe that knowledge is what got him killed at the time at the time and this is a way different world then but i remember watching that at the time and when he did the like and like looked up to the sky like this i was like you know i'm not i wasn't even going where you just were with like oh maybe he knew like something about it but i was going what is the weight behind that yeah the weight of him just giving an opinion on this saying hey i'm just throwing this out there don't shoot the messenger but maybe maybe it could be this like you could tell he was like i'm not really gonna fucking say this do i did i take enough adderall today you know and then he did well he looked up he was he was recalling a conversation in my opinion he was recalling a conversation he he was looking up like what what words did he use okay he used ethnically cleansing that's that's that's how i took it um you know and then and then they tried in vain for two years to get him back on the team successful here's the thing though he from what i could see and i'm just seeing social clips at the time i can't say i'm like the closest person watching charlie kirk while he's doing this but like i would see clips pop up of him doing things not even on college campuses but like at conferences and stuff like that i'm talking in 24 25 where like the israel topic would come up and he would vociferously defend it and we now can see from like some texts and stuff behind the scenes and conversations that were happening in what i've seen especially until those recent texts that candace put out which i think is something we got to come back to but like july 2025 august 2025 the hamptons meeting you know when he did the thing with dave smith and dave smith talks about what they talked about off stage before that debate at the end of july 2025 that's where you could start to see him at least like saying some things out loud on his show when you look at clips but before then after the pbd thing what he thought privately at least one thing but everything he still did publicly to me was very much still like defending the shield here yeah until until august that's when he started uh dropping the mask a little bit um the megan kelly interview i think it was august 6th yep um two days after the hamptons yeah he that was the first time i recall him publicly dropping the mask after that pbd interview and you know uh so in my mind in you know going back you were asking me where i was in september october it wasn't an international operation but i thought it probably had international okay because of the searches that originated from overseas and you were thinking it's interesting though that that early you were already thinking the iran war because again the narrative huge air quotes there but the narrative at the time was oh we did that 12-day thing we came in and bombed ford of the nuclear now you and i know this is bullshit but the nuclear the nuclear stuff's gone so we've stepped out and we're going to do it again and we're going to do it again and we're not going to war and so in my head i was like yeah i'll believe that when i see it but at the same time i will admit i still wasn't thinking like from that point june 2025 i wasn't thinking sometime in the next 12 months we're going to seriously be looking at boots on the ground like as a real plan in iran and then that became like a within nine to eight nine months conveniently after charles charlie's dead they were already talking about it like okay we're starting a war now and maybe we're going to put boots on the ground yeah i mean but you knew i knew everybody in the lead-up to the 12-day war we all kind of had the same thought or a lot of us on on our side of that issue had the same thought which was this this is going to spiral out of control into world war iii you know the iranians are proud people they're not just going to let people come in and bomb them and and go okay well we're sorry guys sorry about that um it it had the it had the potential and the capacity to get very ugly very quickly um and and charlie coming out talking about it in the way he did it it just that's If you're going to go forward, that's a problem you have to deal with. You can't just leave that loose end hanging out there. Why not deal with it earlier, though, if they knew that that was already a thing he was thinking behind the scenes? The reason I ask that is because by the time, if it is alleged like they did deal with it, in September 2025, respectfully, the horse has left the barn. You look at people below 55 in this country, left, right, it's a very unifying issue. Like, what the fuck was he even going to do about it at that point? He was getting killed by his own people. Well, we don't know that they didn't try. So, you know, the fact that something happened on September 10th doesn't mean that there wasn't a very similar operation in place in April, in December the year before that. Like, you can't say definitively this was the only time that they tried. And had they gone on September 10th and something went wrong? And they called off? If they called off the operation, you and I would not be sitting here talking about it. Maybe they would have done it September 29th or October 5th. You know, we don't know that this was the only time that he walked into a death circle and there was a plan to take him out. It could have been. But, like, what if it had rained that day? Right. You know, if the plan is to take him out, you're not going to let a rain shower ruin it. You're going to just, okay, here's our backup plan. Here's the next place we're doing it. You know, it's not lost on me that all of his first events were, like, in Colorado and Utah. They're all right there together. So. How prior to September 10th, when he was going back out on this tour publicly at colleges, you know, in the year before that, how good and deep, you know, by manpower was his security team everywhere he went? How much do we know about that? I want to say Brian Harpole said they typically carried six. With them. And that was on the Sean Ryan show. And I don't quote me on that because maybe he said five or seven. But I want to say it was six. Because I remember the impression it left with me after that show was that they had doubled his security for that day. And I think he said they had 12 or 13 people on the ground that day. And so that would be, I think, fairly average for him. Now, obviously, you know, he's not a president, so it's not a Secret Service team. It doesn't have. Even if it's a deep security team, it doesn't have that kind of resources. But, you know, from what you've been able to gather in the past, was there a protocol with any of his security teams when he would go do public events outdoors that were near roofs where they would scan some roofs and see if there were any security limitations on those? I have no idea. Okay. That'd be interesting to know if they had ever done that. I think it crossed their mind because multiple of them in the aftermath. I have commented on the fact that when he walked in, they looked up and saw all the roofs and it made them uncomfortable. I can't imagine that was the first time it had dawned on anybody that roofs, particularly in light of what happened in Butler the July before. I can't imagine that's the first time it had ever dawned on anybody roofs are a major vulnerability. Sure. Yeah. I would, especially after Butler, you would think you'd be thinking that fucking everywhere. This is over a year after that. The other thing that was weird right from the jump to me, I talked with you about this on the phone, but I'll never forget. When, so he died on a Wednesday and then Friday morning, like we said, that was when they said Tyler Robinson had been arrested. And then I had a wedding to go to on Saturday that was like six hours away. So I was going to get up early and drive there. So Friday night, I'm sitting in here, I'm working and I see something on Twitter that his wife, Erica, is going to come out and give a statement. So I'm like, okay. So I pull up the live stream on YouTube and I just remember seeing her walk in. And the only thing I felt. Was guilt. Because right away, that thing in my gut that goes, what the fuck? Something ain't right here. This ain't real. What? I've never had that thought in a situation like this before. It was blinking on a 12. Yeah. And I'm watching this and I'm like. And, you know, everyone's I'm going to Twitter and everyone's like praising her. It was like a mass like campaign of people being like, oh, my God, bravest woman ever. And I remember shutting the computer afterwards and like just being quiet. And I'm like, that's an impure thought. So mean. This is a grieving widow. Don't think that. But then I'm driving to the wedding the next day and I'm thinking about it in the car. I could not get it out of my head. And so Sunday morning, driving back from the wedding, back up here. I call up my buddy, Danny Jones. And it was like the two of us were like coming out of the closet because I'm like, hey, man, you know, we talk like every day. OK, what's going on? I'm like. You watch that thing the other night? What thing? Oh, the thing with the wife? I'm like, yeah. What? What do you think? And he's like. Bro, it was so weird. I'm like, oh, my God, it was so weird to me, too. I was so my God, I felt like I couldn't tell anyone about this. He's like, dude, something's off. And he's like, even my wife said it. And, you know, women pick up on that shit real good. They know that shit. And we were just talking about it. And I'm like, what is that? And, you know, still the narrative was you'd go on social media. Most people were like, oh. She's so brave. And then you get the WWE wedding with the Vicks and the fucking, you know, no ugly crying. Yeah. I know people grieve weird. But, like, at what point was it the WWE wedding or funeral? I'm sorry. Was it before that? Was it after that? At what point did you start saying to yourself, wait a minute, something ain't right there? Yeah. So it wasn't that for me. I mean, I watched it. I watched the speech. And looking back at it, it sends all kinds of crazy alarm bells off. But at the time. At the time, you know, whatever. And actually, the guy I was talking to when we were first learning about it in real time and the pictures were coming out, the videos were coming out, he called me back, I want to say Monday or Tuesday. So was that like the 15th, maybe? Something like that? It was a day or two before she was announced that she was going to be the person. And he said, hey, I've got some information out of TPUSA. I know who they're going to put in Charlie's place. Because we had talked about the day he died. We talked about who would take over. And TPUSA is just, even if it's just a placeholder. And he had mentioned Tyler Boyer. He had mentioned Benny Johnson. He had mentioned Justin Strife, the COO. You know, he had just been appointed to this new executive role. Why not just put him in there for a little while? And then he had mentioned Erica Kirk. And I was like, who the hell is that? Like, who is Erica Kirk? You know, I didn't know who Charlie's wife was. And then I saw her give that speech. And then he called me back a couple days later. He's like, they're going to give it to Erica. And I was like, why? And he was like, I was like, you know what? I actually probably still have that text. I think the initial part of the conversation was by text. He said, I was like, well, you know what? I think it's the right thing to do in the short run. Because I viewed Tyler Boyer as an opportunist and kind of shady. Benny Johnson, I thought, was like a total disaster. And, you know, TPUSA at the time, even if he didn't like Charlie, it had value. It had the ability to turn voters. It had the ability to turn voters out for conservative causes, Republican candidates at the college level. It just did. And, you know, some of the states were, you know, are decided by 500 votes or 1,000 votes or 10,000 votes. Turning out a couple of college campuses might make the difference. I don't think he's the reason Trump won either election. People say that a lot. And he's credited with that. But I'm not sure that's true. But some of the states get pretty tight. And turning out a bunch of college kids could be helpful. And so I thought, okay, yeah, Erica's probably not bad. She didn't do a terrible job in that speech or whatever. But before the memorial, I had a friend who was going to go to the memorial and backed out and decided not to. He's like, this is too weird. Something way too weird is going on with this. This is, I don't feel comfortable with it. Already booked a plane, already booked a hotel room and just said, no, I'm not going. And so there was already this weirdness that was going around. In advance of the big shebang, the WWE, what do you call it, WWE wedding? WWE funeral, sorry. Funeral, whatever. Felt like a wedding. It did. I mean, she wore white. She dressed like it, too. She wore white. But yeah, I mean, I think, I look back and say, hey, let's assume this was an operation to kill Charlie. And everyone was in on it. Like everyone Charlie knew was in on it. They've done absolutely everything wrong to get away with it. Absolutely everything. Starting with bringing Erica out. Like, she's been a disaster. You know, as you as you dig into her past, as you uncover her prior statements, as you look into inconsistencies and stories she tells on down to how they met. I mean, frankly, Charlie was in on that inconsistency as well. So what was it? They were in a customs line in Israel or something. Well, that's that's when she says she first saw him. But, you know, there's this story that that their first date was. It was at Bob's Burgers in New York City. And that, you know, Charlie slid into her DMs and very slyly invited her to a job interview and then turned it into a date and said, I want to date you. I don't want to hire you. So this is like a cute fairy tale story. I think it's probably mildly illegal by HR standards. But I was going to say, it was like a cross line. But we'll let him have it. We'll let him have it. He didn't hire her, I guess. So, yeah, he didn't. So maybe maybe he got away with it. But then Tyler Boyer is seen on a podcast. saying, no, no, no, they went on a date before when she was here in August, the month before that or two months before that. And, and, you know, I was hyping Charlie up for the date. They went to a gym together. And so, I mean, like everything about everything she says falls apart under the slightest bit of scrutiny. And she's just strange. I mean, even if she's an innocent grieving widow, she's the strangest innocent grieving widow of all time. So if you're trying not to draw scrutiny to the situation, running her out there is the worst thing you can do. Yeah. Had they just put her away for like even a year, you know, hey, we've decided we're going to let Erica Kirk run this thing. She's going to be the CEO, but we're giving her the year on a sabbatical to spend with her family. She'll be in charge. She'll be overseeing everything, but she is expected to keep no office hours. She's going to do no events. She's going to go and grieve. And Justin Strife is going to run the place in the meantime, or Tyler Boyer is going to run the place in the meantime. I don't think there would be a lot of scrutiny on this case. I think a lot. A lot of the scrutiny comes from the feeling you had that September 12th, the feeling your friend had that September 12th, the feeling your friend's wife had that September 12th, the feeling a lot of us had by the end of the WWE funeral. It was just too weird. And then by the time she's shown up at events, tossing out merch, coming out to fireworks. And I mean, it's everything went wrong. And then it's like they realize, oh, well, this version of Erica Kirk's not working. So let's overcorrect. And let's go to, she's only going to wear black now. Whenever she's seen in public, she's going to wear black except the time she's in her little Bo Peep outfit. Then we're going to, then she's going to be little Bo Peep if she's in Arkansas. Like who is she? No one dresses that. You see how I'm dressed. I wear hoodies. That's what I wear. I wear hoodies and t-shirts. If you catch me in a little Bo Peep outfit, something's gone terribly wrong. I'm not, I'm not being myself. So I think there's, um, I think, I think what you perceived, maybe other people took over. But I think it's, it's sort of ubiquitous by now. Yeah. And, and like you said, it's, it's the optics of it too, that you just, from a PR perspective, which shouldn't be what this is about, by the way, it should be about an investigation, trying to get to the truth here, but just at the top layer of PR, the fact that people around TPUSA presumably couldn't see that this was, she just made it worse every time she went out to the point she was still given, you know, live speeches on his show that somehow still named after him, even though he's dead, you know, in like April and May. I'm like, guys, it's been seven months. The polling's in, you know, this is a Jeb Bush. It's not working. This is Jeb Bush. Please clap. Right. Yeah. It's, it's gotta be, you know, I, I didn't, I haven't covered this case a ton on the show. We, we talked about it probably about, three times before, other than we were live on air when, when it happened, obviously we were like all stunned. I was with Nate and Chris from the religion business when that happened, September 10th. But, you know, I didn't do like full podcasts on it. And then a couple of things happened. My, my guy, Alessi has been with me forever, was up in town. He lives down in Florida now and he came up here. So we recorded one on his podcast when he was here and he asked me about it a little bit. And we talked about it in some of those clips, especially the ones with Erica went a little viral where I gave some opinion. Then I had Clint Russell in here as well. And we talked about it a little bit. And then I had Clint Russell in here as well. And we talked about it for about 15 minutes, but until I had Joseph Scott Morgan in here to like, just break down the forensic side of it, we hadn't talked about it in depth, but you have, you've done 150 plus episodes on this at this point. And, you know, you were talking about this right away. So, you know, what was it like in, in October, you know, to be raising those kinds of questions, even about someone who's like a grieving widow and all that at a time where like, you know, a lot of people might take that the wrong way, even if, that is like what we are clearly feel, many of us were clearly feeling and seeing. Was that a little nerve wracking to talk about it that way? I didn't talk about her. You didn't? I didn't. I gave her the benefit of the doubt for months. And What changed? The book tour in December. It was so bizarre, so weird. The interview with Barry Weiss, the Fox and Friends appearance. Every, I watched all of it. And every single appearance she did that week. I think it was like December 10th to 15th, something like that. It was mid, it was mid-December. Every single appearance she did that week was so bananas that I thought, I've got to, I would fight with my listeners. Cause I, at the end of my show, I'll do Q and A and I'll just pull up questions and I, you know, depending on how late I want to stay up. But sometimes I'll do two hours of just Q and A with people, just boop, boop, boop, just questions, questions, questions. And I was fielding questions on a daily basis at the time. Erica's too weird. You're being too nice. She's not a grieving widow. She killed him. And I was like, guys, you can't say that. And I was like, I've never lost my spouse. My spouse is very much alive. We've been married 25 years. Everything's fine. You know, um, that I don't know what I would be like if, if she was suddenly murdered the next day, I have no idea how I'd react. Maybe I would be weird. Um, maybe I would act strangely. I'm very, um, very much not a public crier. Um, I've, I've gotten sad a few times in public and I'm the most awkward, sad public person you've ever seen. I hate it. I'm trying to stop it at the same time. And I just don't like it. Um, it's a very vulnerable position. And if you don't like feeling vulnerable, you don't like being emotional in public. And, uh, you know, I kind of looked at her through those eyes. Maybe she's just very vulnerable. She's had a vulnerable childhood. She had vulnerable relationships. She not very confident in, in her emotions. She doesn't know how to handle them. So was not me just playing the game. This was not me just talking points. I genuinely thought she was acting weird. But I genuinely didn't know what to make of it and was unwilling to comment on it. And then the book tour happened. And I thought, no, this, there's something wrong here. Um, particularly the Barry Weiss interview. I mean, that, that was, that was so performative to me. So strange. Um, the, the love for our greatest ally. And, and, and, I mean, it was like so over the top. And I thought, no, there's something here. This, this is not right. I did. I still, at the time would not come out and say, and I, I don't believe I've ever said she killed Charlie Kirk or she planned to kill Charlie Kirk or she was in on it, but I've have allowed my mind to speculate. And I, what does it speculate? Well, I mean, it speculates that, that she doesn't have a very good alibi for where she was, uh, on September 8th and 9th. It speculates that she doesn't frankly have a very good alibi for where she was on September 10th. Um, where did she say she was again? She said she was at a, on September 10th. Yeah. I think she, I think her current story is, or story maybe has not changed. She was at a clinic with her mom. Um, she was watching the live stream, which is unusual because that live stream supposedly was not something they typically did. That was something new they were doing that day. Um, and Terrell Farnsworth told Candace Owens that they were live streaming quote back to the ops in Arizona, that they were trying something new. Um, and the fact that she's at a clinic with her very ill mother, and I do believe her mother's very ill, the fact that she was at a clinic with her very ill mother, but she's watching the live stream of her husband do something he's done, what, a thousand times? Right. Like, why are you watching that one that day? I mean, you know, Utah Valley University, fine university, not knocking it. It's not Harvard. It's not, you know, it's not Ohio State. It's not UCLA. It's not one of the bigger, super high-profile universities in the country. It's, it's a, it's a good school in the heart of Utah that has some great students and professors, I'm sure. But it's not, you know, if you're going on a college tour and you're talking on all the college tours, a hundred college campuses a year or whatever he was doing, Utah Valley University is not one that would stand out and say, oh my gosh, this is the one I've got to watch live as it happens. Right. And so she says she's watching it and she's watching him throw out hats. So obviously they're live streaming the hat throwing. So who was live streaming the hat throwing? Cause all the other cameras were just focused on Charlie. They were just set up on Charlie. Um, so where he was going to be sitting. Yeah. Yeah. The three teams. So not when he's out standing. Yeah. So, so whose camera is she watching? Whose camera is fixed on him? He's throwing out hats. And then she says she puts her phone face down because she's with her mom. And then she said, Mikey called a few seconds later after it happened. Mikey McCoy. Mikey McCoy, the, um, Charlie's chief of staff. Uh, and, and I think a pretty close family friend of theirs. And, um, and, and, you know, that's a, that's a, that's a good story, but is that the Bob's burger story? You know, did they actually go on a date in Scottsdale before they went to Bob's burgers? Did they, you know, that's a, it's a pretty cool story, but did, did you actually graduate summa cum laude, you know, from, with a double degree from wherever, uh, Arizona state? Uh, that's a pretty cool story, but was that really only your second pageant or was it your sixth? The problem with Erica is it's tough to believe her stories because so many of her stories don't hold up under scrutiny. That's right. And so, you know, if someone asks, where were you on that day? You saying I was with my mom is not very compelling because you say a lot of things that, that when you scrutinize them, don't really hold up. One of the things I would do if I was her PR person is I would, I would get, I would get a hold of everything she's ever said publicly from the, from the time she was 16 doing beauty patches. Until yesterday. And I would somehow, whether you feed it into chat GPT, or whether you just create a spreadsheet or just memorize it, I would figure out what your story is. And I would make sure you either never address anything on that story ever again or you clarify it. I would also, if I was TPUSA, call everybody into a conference room and say the next person that lies is fired. The next person who tells a story that's inconsistent is fired. Like we have a massive credibility gap. It's starting at the top, but it's bleeding through everybody. Andrew, your Twitter feed is a disaster. It is so easily disprovable on many occasions. So let's stop this. Let's stop just winging it. Let's get some discipline. Let's get some messaging, and let's stick to it. And if it's not on the sheet, you don't know. If they ask where you were on this day and it's not on the sheet, I don't know. I'll check my calendar and get back to you because we're only talking about what's on this sheet from now on. But that's surprising. Supposedly where she was on September 10th. And I don't know that I believe it. Have you had, I presume, people from TPUSA reach out to you behind the scenes? Yes. Lots. Lots of them. Like high up people as well, I take it. What's, without revealing specifics of stuff you want to keep private, what's the nature of that? Shut the fuck up? Or like, hey, we want to right your path here. You actually have this wrong. We can help you out with that. Like, what's the nature of that? Like, what are they, what are the types of things they're saying to you? I've been given a lot of corrections where I've speculated on things and they say, here, here's what actually happened. And I've subtly made those corrections without burning a source. Got it. I've had. So meaning you had maybe sources that were around TPUSA or in it that maybe told you something that then wasn't true, verifiably, and you're like, okay, so I don't want to burn them, but. Yeah. I've had people say, well, you didn't quite get it right. Here's what really happened. And then, you know, I can subtly make that change over the next few weeks without anyone really realizing that I've talked to someone. So that's happened a few times. And I've had good contact with a couple of particular people who have given me the temperature of what it's really like in there right now. What's it like in there right now? She's not super supported. Yeah. From some of the top people. Including people that maybe are putting on a face publicly? Oh, yeah. Yeah. That's what I'm told. I can only. The information is only as good as people tell me. But not super supported, not really running things is kind of the. You know, you guys keep saying she's running it into the ground. She's not running much of anything. And that's, you know, that's. That's the two big things. I mean, I've gotten specific piece of information I'm not going to talk about. But that's sort of the general consensus that I keep getting. Got it. When he was shot, obviously, we've seen all the video after that. We use the word shot very loosely there. Yeah, loosely there. But, you know, when he was hit and went down and everyone sees the blood come out and then you see the security team converge, they obviously ended up taking. Taking him, carrying his body back to the truck. There was no ambulance near there, I guess, at the time. So they take him to the truck and what was it, five guys in the car with him? Yeah. Okay. What are some of the things there that you've taken issue with as far as what's been reported about what happened with his body just going from the point of attack to the car to the hospital? You know, I can't second guess the security team and say what I would have done differently. Because I've never. I've never worked personal security. I've never been trained for it. I don't know all the things that go into it. You know, it's easier to hire someone to do it than try to figure it out yourself. It's. But when you look at it, just based on their statements, there are a lot of things I think probably went wrong from the beginning. For example, we talked about the roofs. I think three or four people from TPSA have been on record saying that they were concerned about the roofs. Well, if you're concerned about the roofs, you have two options. Well, three, really. They took the third option and it didn't work out. The first two options, though, could have kept them alive. Number one is you either solve the roof problem by putting your own people on the roofs or you put somebody at a high position that has roof oversight. Like, I've done big events. I've been at big events. Bigger events than that, frankly. You know, tens or hundreds of thousands of people. And I know the security protocol that we were told. You know, hey, you'll have something in your ear. If you hear a certain word, that's stage clear. Everyone's gone. Show's over, folks. You know, sorry, you will not be getting a refund. Goodbye. Why wasn't that in place? Why didn't they have somebody at the highest point? If they're worried about the roofs, figure out which roof is the highest and stick somebody up there. And the second you see somebody in all black climbing on a roof, whatever the code word is, purple, purple, purple, purple, purple, show's over, folks. Charlie's gone. Sorry to end it eight minutes into the program. But, you know, he's insolvent. He's in Salt Lake City before anyone knows what happened. You know, if you're not going to do that, then you have to conduct the entire thing from a different security posture, in my opinion. You have to, if you're not going to have somebody at high point watching the roofs, or you're not going to have somebody stationed on the roofs, you have to have security run in mind with the roofs are a primary concern. So maybe you're watching roofs from the ground. Maybe you have somebody stationed. In a different place, maybe you move the tent. Maybe you delay the event an hour to reconvene from a slightly different angle or a slightly different location. I don't know. But I know the third option is the one they chose. And it's what it was. Hey, Charlie, we don't like the looks of these roofs. These roofs look dangerous. You look like you're at risk here. Sit here. Do your show here. We'll make sure nobody's overlooking the roofs. We'll make sure nobody's on the roofs. Just have a seat here, sir. You'll be fine. That's that's that's not it. I mean, I I've said this many times on my show. If I'm hiring security people, I'd rather have somebody smart than beefy. You know, the fact that you can roll around and shoot a gun while you're rolling is not as impressive to me as watching around as I'm walking down the street. Not as impressive as having situational awareness and enough of an IQ that you can detect, hey, something's not right. I don't feel good. Let's let's go a different direction. Let's get out of here. So his IQ is pretty good, man. He's a very smart guy. Struck me that way. We IQ people. We IQ test people. No, but I mean, that's that's more of a concern to me, you know, because once the shooting starts, you've lost. That's right. You know, the game's over. Yeah, I tell people this with a lawyer all the time. Don't get sued. Once you get sued, you've already lost. I don't care if you win, you've lost. It's gonna cost you a lot of money. It's very inconvenient. It's very. Lawyers win. Yeah. There with with free speech and journalism, there are some protections because you can always, you know, like anti-SLAPP statutes, for example, I'm sure you're familiar with. I'm sure you're familiar with with what you do, but I think from a pre-show posture, it seems to me evident on its face that there's a failure, but that's not me coming and saying Brian Harpoel's group failed Charlie and got him killed. That's not the point. My point is, as we're second guessing and looking, the next time somebody does an event and someone doesn't feel comfortable with the roofs, let's evaluate the roofs. Let's think about it and let's evaluate whether we should do the show at all or should we put people in different places? The excuse they keep giving that, "Oh, we only have permission to be in this area right here," well, Tyler Robinson didn't have permission to get on the Loci Center roof either, but he did. That's their story. So if he doesn't have permission to get up there, yet somehow manages to, you've got 12 or 13 people with you and you can't put one person on the highest point in the facility that's overlooking the tent, the Loci Center would have been a pretty good place. You'd have had operational oversight over the entire field. Well, that sounds like a great place to be. Right. When did this happen? This particular security team, though, because, again, this was a new tour he was going on. This was the first one. They put this team together shortly before that, right? Those guys hadn't all worked together for Charlie Kirk prior to this point, or am I misremembering that? I think the base of the team had worked for Charlie Kirk for a while. Right, but not every single guy on the team together working for him. I don't know whether we can say they've never worked for him, but I know that they hadn't spent years working with him. I think we can safely say that. Got it. All right, so you talked about the.30-06 and some of the issues with, you know, wondering how the hell that bullet could have been stopped and all that, and you mentioned, what was the gentleman's name again who initially had the shot from another? Chris Martenson. Chris Martenson, so you mentioned his theory. What do you, like, bad visual to give, but come to your head, what do you think actually killed him? I don't know. You don't know? I don't know. I don't think it was a gunshot. I don't necessarily think it was a single modality. I think it could have been multiple things taking place at once. What do you mean by that? Well, I mean, if you're going to, if you've made an operational decision to kill Charlie Kirk, are you going to have the entire operation rest on a single point of failure? In other words, are we going to put a sniper on the roof and hope he kills him? You know, people get shot point blank in the head and live. if the goal is to kill him, you want him dead. Like you do not want him walking out of there. And so maybe you, maybe you have built-in redundancy, you know, when you get on an airplane, if there's no, there's no critical function that, that rests on a single point of failure. There's, there's backup, usually, usually triplicate backup. That's why planes don't fall out of the sky very often. Cars are different. Cars have single points of failure, but you just pull over to the side of the road. You can't pull the plane over to the side of the road. You know, it's going to fall out of the sky from 35,000 feet. So most critical functions are redundant. And I think in this situation, you probably have redundancy. And so it's undeniable to me that something moved, something caused his shirt to move in a very unnatural way that's inconsistent with a bullet. The road microphone, actually travel with him, I have him with me. The road microphone goes from his right collar all the way towards the middle of his neck. Those have mass. They're not easy to move. His necklace, which is hanging down by. Wait, they have what? I'm sorry. They have mass. I mean, they're not styrofoam. Like M-A-S-S? Yeah, mass. Okay, yeah, yeah. Yeah. I mean, they have substance. They're not the heaviest things in the world, but they're not the lightest things in the world. To get one to move at that pace in two frames of a camera, you know, you're talking a 30th of a second, a 15th of a second. To move from your right collarbone to the middle of your neck in a 15th of a second or 30th of a second, that's very, very fast. Something caused that. Did it explode? Did something eject out of it? I don't know. Was it damaged? Did it remain whole? I don't know. It would be easy to prove it remained whole. Just, you know, those record on a 32-bit waveform, just release it, you know, or show us that it kept recording. I think you could fake it, but at least you could try to show that it didn't explode. So his microphone moved. His necklace, the charm was hanging down in the pictures down below his sternum, like right below his xiphoid process right there. It shot up towards his neck at basically the speed of light. I mean, it was so fast. What caused that? That's not a gunshot wound to the neck. Necklaces don't jump that high when you're struck in the neck. There are some angles that look like the necklace on the back of his neck, the chain on the back of his neck goes straight back off his neck, or at least his shirt goes straight back off of his neck. And you can still see the neck, and I don't see a hole. So if the gunshot wound to the neck is supposedly causing all this stuff, why is this happening before a hole appears in his neck? Now, it's possible the hole was super small, but it didn't look super small with that much blood coming out of it. So there's just a lot of problems with the gunshot narrative that I default to the fact that there's, there's something that was acting on his, on his body. There was some force that was acting on his body. Whether that force came from the microphone, from the necklace, whether it was some high-tech force that we don't even know exists, you know, some sort of, you know, for lack of a better word, like an EMP or something that blasted at him all at once. I really don't know the answer to that. Is there a way that, whether it's in like Chris Martinson's lane of, of a second, an actual second shooter down there, different gun, is there a way that if someone's shooting from much closer than 138 yards, as it was alleged where Tyler Robinson shot, that, you know, the kinetic energy or types of things that could happen could explain the movement of the mic, of the shirt, of the, of the chain in the back and all that in a more satisfying way than what they say happened from 138 yards away? I think the closer you are, the more force the 30 caliber round arrives with, the more likely it is to blow out the back of his neck. Um, so I'm, I'm not entirely satisfied with that, but I think, you know, I, I don't think he was shot with a bullet. Uh, if he was, it was a redundancy because the injuries are, in my opinion, and the people I've talked to, I've talked to several medical professionals last couple of days since the, uh, since the prosecution filed their motion that included a few lines from the medical exam. Um, they, oh, they filed it. Yeah. I mean, there, there's injuries from the top of his heart to the top of his head. Um, it's, it's really difficult for me to accept that, all of that took place from a single gunshot wound. So injuries, meaning like internal bleeding, bruises every day, like a litany of things. Hemorrhaging. Um, I, I'm not a doctor and they were big words and I had to look up every word just to understand what they were saying. Uh, but I mean, even like the parietal lobe of his brain above it was damaged. I mean, you're talking like two feet worth of, of injuries. Um, it's, it, it, it's something that's just to me unprecedented. Like I, I looked and looked for examples of those types of injuries from gunshot wounds. You can't find the collection of them in any single gunshot wound to the neck that I could find. I did not look at every medical exam ever conducted in history, but that'd be interesting. It's way above my pay grade. Yeah. Way above mine as well. That's interesting that it's that it's a tremendous amount of, uh, of, of, um, of damage. The, the most telling thing that they filed in their motion was that he, his C2 to C6 was obliterated. Is that what they wrote? Yeah. The, the left side. So the side where the wound was, uh, from C2, which is way up here to C6, which is down here, the left side of all those vertebrae were completely obliterated and his spinal cord was traumatically absent in that range. Meaning there was no connection from his brain to his body at all. So even beyond death, when he was hit, he was a quadriplegic. Am I hearing? Hearing that right? Or did I totally put that out? Yes. According to the medical exam. Okay. But then now go back and watch the video and I can't play the video on YouTube. Neither can you because YouTube doesn't like that video. But if you go back and watch the video after this all happens, after his C2 to C6 spinal cord is completely gone, traumatically absent, completely transected. He fences. Do what? He fences, right? He, he, he clenches both fists. He flexes his elbows. His knees stay out. He stays erect. His head stays up. And there's no way, again, way above my pay grade. There's no medical explanation for that being physically possible. No, I talked to a neurosurgeon yesterday after that came out or two days ago, whenever it was. Um, I talked to, uh, a professor of that, that I can't remember what his title was, but it was long. Um, and I had them go over this with me line by line and both of them agreed. And the professor started giving me citations to PubMed papers that that it's impossible that once you lose that once it transects you have about one tenth of a second before everything goes flaccid and and the way he described it was he said i'm not saying flaccid like he would have dropped the microphone i'm saying he would have lost all muscle tone from the neck down like every muscle would have turned into just goo it would just complete his knees would have collapsed he would have fallen immediately off the chair his head would have immediately fallen over he would have he wouldn't have held on to the microphone and then slowly let it go like we watched the video together yeah he wouldn't have slowly let go of the microphone everything would have collapsed the gravity would have taken over to his body in instantly like he said like a tenth to a tenth and a half of a second is all you have left once those electrical charges are gone the body's done it's no longer receiving any input whatsoever from the brain so i look at that and i say okay well something obviously was still acting on his body i'd speculated in october because of uh because of a medical professional who contacted me and and he said at the time that it looked more like electrocution than a gunshot to him because electrocution yeah he said because because of the flexion and this was after the andrew colvette tweet is what prompted him to to reach out because he said hey if if he had that much damage to his vertebrae his spinal cord likely was transected and he wouldn't have been holding on to anything something had to be powering his spine and he was not holding on to anything and he was not holding on to anything his nervous system that's not his brain and the only thing he was holding on to that had power was the microphone he said have you looked into the fact that the microphone may have lit him up and so i started looking up um video of singers who would touch those same sm58 sure microphones and they did the they did a lot of the same stuff that you know and fall back to the to the stage um so i don't know i really don't know what it was um but i i'm confident 9.9 confident it was not a 30 out 6 to the neck that that would not produce in my opinion and i'm not a doctor but i have talked to them and they're confident as well uh it wouldn't produce those damages like something else was going on um it's possible he was struck with something in the neck other than a 30 out 6 um it's possible he was electrocuted it's possible something happened to the road microphone it's possible something else was strapped to his body that we don't even know was strapped to his body because they were trying something new and streaming back to the ops in in arizona um but but to me the 30 out 6 narrative died with that filing uh keep in mind when a medical examiner does the exam they're not watching the video they're just describing what they see yeah you know and they might very well have seen that damage but they didn't know he was still flexing and had this apparent decorticate posture after his c2 to c6 was traumatically absent so you know to answer the question how did he die i don't know um would you make it a bullet did we have a picture of that do you have a picture of that i don't know i don't know i don't know i don't know the bullet they released at the preliminary hearing where they put out it was like a measuring stick because again i do live in a country where they released they talked about magic bullet so yeah well this is not only does go up this is not only a magic bullet it's a missing bullet um the the lady who tested it for the atf the lady who testified about the testing for the atf um read from a report where seven fragments were removed from charlie's body seven fragments yeah but she only received four in an envelope in a manila envelope she received four of the seven i would think in a murder investigation you would want if you pull something out of his body that would go along with the rest of the evidence where are the other three pieces are these the same four pieces that were pulled out of his body i don't know uh it's possible the autopsy photos will will show that yes in fact those were exactly what was pulled out of his body but we also don't know the chain of custody of his body um he wasn't taken by ambulance he was surrounded by security people who didn't guard the roof you um so that's the casing yeah the one that was at sorry i forgot to say the one that actually showed like the aftermath of it they released the trial you know when we did solo number 23 after jsm i think i put that link in that google drive folder that would have been like three weeks ago so it should be there but it shows it next to like an actual measurement so you can see like how the bullet allegedly changed and all that but like so do you think you would you would use this word a few minutes ago i want to make sure i understood this you said there could have been something that was a redundancy yeah meaning like maybe a bullet was fired after he was already hit with something else well so this would be an example of redundancy i'm not saying this is it but let's throw everything in together that's it um you've got let's say he was the mic electrocuted him he was shot in the neck the road microphone exploded they broke his neck under the table they you know broke his neck under what i'm saying is you every theory out there is it could be pulled into this redundancy you know um in other words he's walking in and he's not walking out right we'll kill you know we'll rasputin this guy all at once if we have to um but once we did once we give the signal once we give the go-ahead which may or may not have been you know steal third yeah uh you know i'm still amused by dan flood stepping forward and touching his right arm and everyone's like oh it's something he did all the time i'm like okay show me him all the time that was such a weird bizarre uh and and probably the if it was a total coincidence it was the worst timing to step forward about 400 milliseconds before uh your guys killed that is one thing about this it's like if for some reason like the fed narrative were mostly right or whatever the number of things that were the worst possible coincidental timing forget chaos i know things are chaotic but like you couldn't have drawn it up any better yeah i mean you don't have an ambulance your security guy steps forward and does this you're you're uh you're you're resonant theologian who just decided to show up is grabbing his hat you know you've got like the the number of terrible coincidences that would take place if this was just tyler robinson on the roof um it it would it would be an interesting uh discussion yeah now what so if this has the measurement on it from the atf or whatever this is what they allegedly released this is where so we're going to be doing a podcast you and me later with joseph as well which would be cool to have you to be able to go back and forth on stuff like this so we should probably kind of save this for that because i'm not the guy but he still shouldn't be right there you come here you stand right here do not move from this spot yeah don't walk around don't pour water don't pour water on the surface please the crime scene i beg you well i'll proffer that the guy walking around talking to those two cops grabbed the chair set it up under the camera took the cameras down moved them set them on the table uh removed some object from it we believe it's the sd card that's his story remove something from the camera and then walks off is that does that fall below the standard and allow that to happen can i play that on a loop yeah that's i just wanted that on the record yeah that's there was something he was explaining with the measurement of the camera and he said i'm not the guy walking around talking to those two cops here and how that would have turned out that way but what you're seeing is essentially from what my eye test can see that's like a mushroomed kind of bullet like it hit a wall and stopped well that's just the jacket that's not the bullet so that's right down there that is yeah that's the front and back of the same fragment that's a fragment of the jacket wow so the little pieces at the top those are little pieces of bullet up up there where the bullet is and that's where the bullet is and that's where the bullet is and that's where the bullet is and that's where the bullet is and that's where it says eight a six b well says eight a six b well says eight a six b well b through e or a little piece okay so b through e or a little piece okay so b through e or a little piece okay so that would be among the seven fragments that would be among the seven fragments that would be among the seven fragments that she's talking about yes the atf wouldn't that she's talking about yes the atf wouldn't that she's talking about yes the atf wouldn't okay all right that makes sense so what you're okay all right that makes sense so what you're okay all right that makes sense so what you're seeing at the bottom is the front and back seeing at the bottom is the front and back seeing at the bottom is the front and back of the same piece okay um and she described of the same piece okay um and she described of the same piece okay um and she described a 30 caliber round is called 30 caliber because a 30 caliber round is called 30 caliber because a 30 caliber round is called 30 caliber because it's in theory 0.30 inches so it's in theory 0.30 inches so it's in theory 0.30 inches so but a 30-06 is actually 0.308 inches but a 30-06 is actually 0.308 inches but a 30-06 is actually 0.308 inches the bore diameter is 0.30 the bore diameter is 0.30 the bore diameter is 0.30 but the grooves inside the bore are but the grooves inside the bore are but the grooves inside the bore are 0.308 0.308 0.308 and so if you take a 308 measured round and so if you take a 308 measured round and so if you take a 308 measured round and you slip it through a bore that's 0.30 and you slip it through a bore that's 0.30 and you slip it through a bore that's 0.30 but the ridges are 0.308 but the ridges are 0.308 but the ridges are 0.308 you should in my opinion and from what you should in my opinion and from what you should in my opinion and from what i've been able to research have a jacket i've been able to research have a jacket i've been able to research have a jacket fragment that measures fragment that measures fragment that measures closer to 0.308 on the where the ridges closer to 0.308 on the where the ridges closer to 0.308 on the where the ridges are are are there's some compression as it goes there's some compression as it goes there's some compression as it goes through the bore through the bore through the bore but i'm not sure you'd lose all of it but i'm not sure you'd lose all of it but i'm not sure you'd lose all of it but that's obviously for people smarter but that's obviously for people smarter but that's obviously for people smarter than than i am than than i am than than i am what were the things in the five-day what were the things in the five-day what were the things in the five-day preliminary hearing preliminary hearing preliminary hearing that stood out the most to you that you that stood out the most to you that you that stood out the most to you that you felt were just felt were just felt were just didn't help matters didn't help matters didn't help matters uh well the the biggest uh well the the biggest uh well the the biggest inconsistency of the entire five days inconsistency of the entire five days inconsistency of the entire five days in my opinion in my opinion in my opinion they had video footage they showed that they had video footage they showed that they had video footage they showed that they alleged was tyler robinson coming they alleged was tyler robinson coming they alleged was tyler robinson coming back to try to retrieve the gun at 12 47 back to try to retrieve the gun at 12 47 back to try to retrieve the gun at 12 47 a.m a.m a.m so 12 hours later yeah roughly 12 hours so 12 hours later yeah roughly 12 hours so 12 hours later yeah roughly 12 hours later and they show a car that looks a later and they show a car that looks a later and they show a car that looks a lot like a dodge challenger and it's it's rolling up and this is recovered from doorbell cam footage from across the street they they show a little clip of it it's very muddy it's very blurry you can't see what's going on but you can see a door open you can see headlights and taillights but they they clipped it i mean they kept they just kept showing you a little piece of it a little piece of it a little piece of it and then the prosecution you know finishes their examination and then on cross the defense is like hey um the lady who took that she saw a bald man driving the car with three passengers right and the guy was like oh i don't know i don't know uh and she's like well that's the statement she gave right he's like well yeah she did do a statement where she said she thought she saw a bald man driving with three passengers sorry we forgot that one yeah okay that would have been good information on direct that would be really good information on direct you know when you're trying a case you're not only trying your strengths you're also looking at your weaknesses uh now granted this isn't a trial you don't have a trier of fact there i mean judge kind of sits as a trier of fact as a magistrate but but you you certainly certainly are trying because of how public this is trying to capture the public's trust to me the prosecution has to have an explanation for that like why did she think that that might be a good time if you're going to introduce that footage that might be a good time to go ahead and bring her in and let her explain why she thinks she saw that maybe she has glaucoma maybe she hallucinates maybe she takes ambien maybe she you know has a history of mental illness maybe she wasn't wearing her glasses that night but why you know if you have a statement from somebody that says oh you're saying that tyler robinson's car that was actually driven by a bald man and he had three passengers in the car that was a huge problem in my opinion because it showed to me it showed the prosecution was dishonest they knew that existed and they did their direct examination and never mentioned it and i guess they thought the defense either wasn't going to see it or wasn't going to bring it up i don't know why they would think that um but that that to me is is evidence big evidence that the prosecution's hiding the ball on this on this case it's not a strange timeline thing there's a lot of strange timeline things in this case especially as it relates to tyler robinson like what the fact that he so you and i talked about this but i'm trying to think like what you said was off record with this i don't want to say anything wrong well don't risk it or clip it out all right i have a thought you and i'll talk about that after maybe i'll bring that up tomorrow so let me let me punt on that for a second but like you have the video of him that's more hd walking around in hallways around the building this wasn't a school he went to or anything so it's like that's interesting that he was there so we can at least place him like at the place and then the video of him that we referenced earlier that jack pozobiec claimed to see things that clearly he didn't see you know up on the rooftop is from far away and this is someone who at the time when you review that video because now there's i think it's the same one but it's more it's better rendered the one that candace put out you can see it closer and you can see a figure who does not appear to have a leap a a limp sorry a figure who is moving very quickly as a result does not appear to be physically hiding a gun in his pants as we had seen in some of the other videos as well and who then gets down into a position but we can't see him take out a gun or pull a trigger or anything like that he does a military crawl on the way there which would suggest he's extremely highly trained like he was in the military which this kid was not and then is able to get away quickly and run again without a limp off the building presumably with the gun and to me this was like a bit of a shocking video to see because to me it's like first of all question and I'd like to pose this to you do you think that's Tyler Robinson no okay let's start there so you don't think that's Tyler Robinson on the roof but you did but the video of him walking through the hallways that's him so where do you think that's him in the hallways either you don't think that's him in the hallways you know I don't think you can tell and in fact Lance twigs when he was doing his 1102 statement via zoom for some reason and not in the courtroom or not with a court reporter is that that's strange to do it that way yes preliminary hearing yes okay yeah I think so I mean I think it's highly unusual that you would introduce a zoom call as evidence in a in a preliminary hearing yes very unusual to me but they show those six pictures that they have of the alleged Tyler Robinson on campus and they said you know can you identify the person there he's like not a hundred percent not based on those pictures and he's looking at all six of them all six pictures and his face is visible and everything else and he says well yeah I mean you know based on the clothes he you know he's wearing jeans you know he's got those shoes he likes to wear hats he's wearing a hat here I've never seen him in that hat but he's wearing a hat yeah and the sunglasses yeah and then so you can in my opinion it's almost as if somebody's off screen going dude that's him you have to say it's him because he's like oh yeah and in those last two definitively I can say that's him but yeah exactly but he had already said that he couldn't identify him and he was already looking at those two pictures so what changed in that 30 seconds of hemming and hawing um it didn't it didn't leave a lot of confidence that that's Tyler Robinson it didn't leave a lot of confidence that Lance Twiggs thought it was Tyler Robinson do you think Tyler Robinson was on campus that day I think he was an oram uh I don't know whether he was on campus I've not seen uh evidence that's convincing that he was on campus do you have and this may be like way outside the scope I'm just asking but do you know a reason why he would have been in oram no I mean I I operate under the assumption that he was there to engage in some sort of criminal conspiracy whether that was to kill Charlie Kirk or cause some sort of mischief at an event or what but but I do think he was probably there as some sort of a group that he believed was going to pull off some sort of criminal activity uh that would put him in oram whether or not his role was to ever be on campus I don't know so I'm playing out a pure spec total hypothetical here but in that type of scenario could it be something where he and a group of people who may disagree with Charlie Kirk's beliefs were colluding to disrupt an event like that and perhaps because they're talking about that on digital spaces that could be picked up by other people who view that as a very advantageous cover to be able to do something a little a lot worse than that do you think something like that is a plausible scenario uh plausible sure um you're you're given a lot of credit to these discord groups that they're not infiltrated with with bad actors on purpose oh sure that's another yeah absolutely and that they're not manipulating these groups that's right that they're not the ones making these comments and they're not the ones opening these accounts saying oh something bad's gonna happen right um but yeah I mean it you know taking it in a very favorable light sure something like that could happen okay do you think based on the video again this was what Candace put out the other day but based on that video do you think that the person there if it wasn't Tyler Robinson is someone who whether it was a gun that we can't see very well that might be a different kind of gun or with some sort of trigger to do something else is the person who actually pulled off killing Charlie Kirk no I mean I I think the person on the roof was one of two things either it was another step of redundancy uh meaning the person did have a gun but it wasn't a 30 out six because I don't see a 30 out six up there but has some sort of weapon up there that could that could kill Charlie Kirk if needed and let's say let's just assume the signal was Dan Flood stepping forward touching his arm I'm not Dan don't sue me I'm not saying that's a signal I'm just saying let's let's just assume pure speculation um but let's say that is a signal and he sees the signal and then a second goes by and nothing's happened yet now you shoot you know in other words you're the backup to the backup to the backup um or that guy was just a decoy they needed to see somebody on that roof because that was going to be the story and we had to capture him on video so you got to get up there you got to lay down in position you got to run off don't worry our camera's way back there no one's going to see what you're doing they're you know I think the person on the roof was likely one of those two roles and not actually the one who did anything on that day I started to make that timeline point a couple minutes ago but didn't want to go on that other thing we'll talk about after so I can make sure I know what I say but wasn't there also like with these discord messages that did look some of them highly suspect from the get-go to me but wasn't there something where some of them were allegedly sent after he allegedly had been arrested according to what the story is so that well yeah so there's there's a lot of debate on that um I was looking at the filings and I noticed in the defense's filing that they made along the way one of their filings they referenced a time stamp when Tyler invoked his fifth amendment right to silence but they didn't put a date on it it just said 6 25 p.m and so I thought what was 6 25 p.m where was that so I was looking for context clues in that statement and he made a comment about uh the lawyer's office that I want is closed for the night he said I'm looking for a lawyer here his name is xyz whatever his name was um and he's he's it looks to me like he's very clearly invoking his right to remain silent for the first time if you assume that 6 25 is accurate and I don't know why the defense would put the wrong time in there so I assume it's accurate you look and you say well there's really only two options of when that conversation could have taken place it could have taken place on September 11th which is a or it could have taken place on September 12th which is a Friday which is the day after he turned himself in and even on the their the official narrative timeline that 6 25 p.m would be like 21 hours after he turned himself in and so knowing those two facts it has to be one of those two times 6 25 on Thursday or 6 25 on Friday go back and look at the context again I'm looking for a lawyer here uh named so and so well here would have been Washington County that's where he turned himself in because the lawyer he named was practicing in Washington County he wasn't practicing in Utah County he wasn't from Utah County that's four hours away why would he say I'm looking for a lawyer here then he says my parents are trying to get in touch with him his office is closed for the night closed for the night not the weekend if it's 6 30 on Friday do you say the office is closed for the night what lawyer opens up on Saturday morning the fact that he's saying my parents are trying to get in touch with him means that he had just spoken with his parents and knew they were trying to get in touch with him and that his office was closed for the night that's more with a Thursday night where he had just spoken to his parents minutes before than it is Friday night where he hadn't spoken to his parents in 21 hours and has no idea what his parents have been doing for 21 hours maybe they did get in touch with a lawyer maybe they've already gotten him maybe maybe his office isn't still closed for the night we have no idea what's going on so I looked at all those context clues and I raised the possibility that that conversation actually took place on Thursday not Friday well if it took place on Thursday at 6 25 it took place an hour and a seven and so that led me to believe it's possible those discord messages were fake they weren't from him at all and they're inconsistent with taking your right to remain silent you're going to invoke the right to remain silent to the sheriff but you're going to confess to anybody with a link to a discord chat forever that's going to be there forever yeah that's right anyone who ever gets that url can log in and see your confession but you don't want to confess but you want to invoke your right to remain silent and then go back to his text messages to Lance Twiggs I intended to take this to my grave okay well you're taking it to your grave you're talking to your alleged boyfriend about it and then you go and confess to a discord chat that you don't you don't even met all these people in there you don't know who all these people are um yeah it's it's totally inconsistent so I looked at all that and I concluded that it very likely was a Thursday afternoon invocation of his fifth amendment rights not a Friday afternoon invocation and if that's the case um do we have any other context clues well we didn't at the time but a couple months later maybe maybe a month or two later the defense file of this prosecution rather files of an exhibit list and on the exhibit list they list out by bait stamp number the exhibits they tend to offer one of those is Tyler Robinson in the Washington County Sheriff's Office on September 11th that's the same bait stamp number that was cited that's right in that original 6 25 p.m time stamp so I look at that and say no brainer obviously that was September 11th at 625 p.m. This is a huge problem. Third context clue. came during the preliminary hearing, they wanted to show that his clothing, when he turned himself in, was consistent with what he was wearing on that day. So they wanted to show him at the Washington County Sheriff's Office in the maroon t-shirt. When they do, they zoom it in so you don't get the timestamp on that security footage. That was a big indication to me that that very well could have been that. The fourth context clue is one of these press outfits in Utah. I don't want to cite the one because I don't want to cite the wrong one, but one of the press outfits in Utah wanted to get a copy of the footage of him turning himself in. They wouldn't release it to him. Do you think they'll release that at trial? I honestly don't know because turning yourself in is not part of the crime. So they don't have to. You could convict him without turning that in. It's possible we'll never see that. And then they lied to the press and said that they had deleted it because it extended beyond the retention period. The prosecution said that? The Washington County Sheriff's Office said that. And then the Washington County Sheriff miraculously resigns in March of this year under a cloud of suspected bad behavior. And so I put all that together, five, six pieces of context clues, some of which are really solid, in my opinion, like the base stamps number. And I think some of those discord messages may have come after he turned himself in, which raises suspicion on every statement that he made about he did it. Have you spoken, and if you can't talk about this, no problem, but have you spoken with any sources in or around or in some way connected to the knowledge of like the thinking of his family and where they stand on whether or not, at this point, whether or not they believe he actually did it? Yes. They don't believe he did it. So is it fair to assume you're referring to like his mother and father don't believe that? Yeah. Um, there's a, there's a guy on X. Um, I know him. I believe him. Um, I have personal knowledge that he has spoken to the grandmother. Okay. And that's well known. It's the grandfather's gun, right? That was, that was the alleged thing. Okay. Yep. And he has spoken to the grandmother and I've seen text messages between the, you know, family. Um, they, they deny that he confessed to them. They deny that, um, that he turned himself in because he was guilty. Um, they don't think he did it. Now, did they think he did it at the time? No, they've never thought he did it. They never thought. And what's miraculous is that we get to the preliminary hearing. We've been told for 10 months by TPUSA people, by their spokespeople, by their hangers on their paid contributors. We've been told for 10 months that he confessed to his parents. And that's a, that's a key component of this. That's why we know he did it. He confessed to his parents. He turned himself in. We heard this for 10 solid months. We get to the preliminary hearing. They're not even on the witness list. Like you talk about bulletproof probable cause. If your mom gets on the stand and says, yeah, he told me he did it. Yeah. You're fucked. It's over. We don't need a trial. I mean, at that point I'm going, well, maybe I'm wrong this whole time. Could part of it, I got to ask it this way as a devil's advocate, could part of it be? There's no way my baby did that. And like, it's just setting in after enough time to think about it, being like, you know what? I just don't believe it. If his parents told law enforcement that he did it, that would be documented. If you put them on the stand and they deny that he said it, you impeach him with the documentation. He didn't tell them. I'm telling you that is so, so much evidence that they've been lying to us this whole year. Otherwise we would have heard from them. What do you make of the, and it'll be interesting to talk about this with you and Joseph to go back and forth on it because he's more familiar with the actual process and what it could or should have been. But what do you make of the handling of Charlie's body from what we know from when he was declared dead at the hospital to when there's video taken that we can determine around the time it was taken of Erica allegedly over his casket where he has an embalmed body being prepared to be flown back to Arizona, which was less than 24 hours later. It's too fast. Way too fast. We also have a filing from the defense where they talk about the autopsy photos and the autopsy photos. They want all of them. And they said they were all dated September 10th. He died on September 10th, right? He allegedly didn't even get to the medical examiner's office until close to nine o'clock that night. The autopsy was done by midnight. I mean, I'm looking forward to the conversation with Joseph because I'm curious if that sounds unusually fast. I would think they would be autopsying a warm body at that point. When did they cool him down? The standard, I think, and he'll know more than I do, but from what I can tell from the people I've talked to, from the research I've done, it looks like most of the time an autopsy is done with a body that's been cooled down to below 40 degrees. That's a six to eight hour process. And why such a hurry? Why do it in the middle of the night? Why not, if you're going to do an autopsy and it's only going to take a couple of hours, come back at eight o'clock in the morning when everyone's fresh, had a nice sleep, gotten a good breakfast, drank a cup of coffee. All right, let's roll him in here. He's been cooled down. Let's see what's going on in here. You know, nothing's changing between 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. Why this massive hurry? I, I, I am very much looking forward to that conversation. Uh, I have no interest in trying to change his mind on anything, but I have a lot of questions that I think he, as an expert, would be able to answer. I think it's going to be amazing because like the combination of you looking at it from an investigative litigation standpoint and him looking at it strictly from a forensic standpoint will be great. Cause that was the other thing that when I had him in here, I didn't do a good enough job of, you know, making it clear with him. We're just looking at like the forensics of it, all the other stuff around it and the things leading up to it. That's not his lane, but you know, we'll talk about it tomorrow. Cause you're going to be here as well. And it'll be interesting to see if those worlds kind of collide. But it was, I remember, and I called him when, like a few days later when I was thinking about it, because I put together the timeline in my head. Once you put out that post of like when that must've been based on when that flight was at 5 p.m. or whatever to go to Arizona the next day. And I was like, that just seems like, you know, this is a very high profile killing. I would think you're doing a little extra. I know everybody is supposed to be treated the same, but I'm thinking, you know, maybe you do a little more crossing the T's and dotting the I's with this one with a public execution like that. That's just me, but I don't know. So it'd be interesting to see what he thinks there. But also I referenced it a little bit ago and forgot to ask you about it. Obviously when a scene like this happens, it's chaos. People react in weird ways in certain ways that includes people in the audience. But again, public event, we have different videos of the immediate aftermath. You see weird things like someone taking down the camera. Taking out some cards and then, you know, that whole thing and whatever. Was there anything there besides the security team that we kind of talked about that stood out where you're like, that, that doesn't make sense at all. I don't know why someone would do that in that scenario. Yeah. I mentioned Dan Flood stepping forward and touching his arm. I'll say it till I'm blue in the face. That was the weirdest thing I've ever seen from an alleged security person. And if you take it, if you take that video footage and you line it up with what's going on on the roof, uh, which has been done, it's even weirder, uh, because you see lots of different things taking place. Uh, no longer is it just Dan Flood stepping forward. Now you have Brian Harpo taking a step back. Right. Um, he had been standing roughly in the same position the whole time. He's now, um, there's a woman who comes from behind the screen, right? As the guy starts to get into place and she hands him some, some mints, he said, and he takes the mints and he doesn't need him mints. He just sticks them in his pocket. Well, why is she passing out mints? If, you know, so it seems like, was she sitting back there waiting for, I don't know, and I'm not accusing anyone, but was, you know, was she sitting back there waiting for a guy to, you know, start running into position? Uh, why, why was the sound bad all of a sudden when Hunter Kozak got up to start asking questions? The sound seemed fine while the first guy was asking questions. Now the guy that wants to get up and ask about transgender violence, uh, starts asking questions and we get all this feedback in the system. Uh, why did Philip Goldsberry Jr. turn his head, uh, away from Charlie Kirk before the shooting? Like, I mean, or before the bang, like half a second before, um, what, you know, once Brian Harpole steps behind Frank Turek, uh, Frank Turek then turns towards Charlie Kirk and grabs his hat. Well, when he grabs his hat, Dan Flood looks at him and then looks to the left for some reason. And we don't know who he's looking at. And then he steps forward and touches his arm. And then you hear the crack. Like all that may have been innocent. All may have been innocent. Weird though. But when you look at it and you put it in that video footage of the guy running on the roof and you watching it, you're watching it all take place. It almost looks like a choreographed dance. Now, again, may turn out Tyler Robinson did it with a 30 out six from the low C center roof. And that was just the most unfortunate series of events that's ever happened. But it looks like a series of signals. I mean, even the guy asking the question turns and does something that, that starts the casket. I mean, the whole thing is weird. And it might only be weird because something happened. It might be weird you know, maybe, maybe lots of people asking questions, turn their head and look at somebody and play with their glasses. Maybe lots of people grab their hat. Maybe lots of people get mints and reposition themselves. Maybe lots of people step forward and do this right before, uh, you know, during a speaker. But when you watch it in context, knowing that there was a loud bang that killed Charlie, now it starts to look like this multi-faceted, multi-step checkoff. Like, yes, I'm clear. Yes, I'm clear. Yes, I'm clear. Yes, I'm clear. Yes, I'm clear. Bang. Um, and so I don't know. Um, you ask what's weird in that moment. That is, that is weird. Um, the cameraman behind Charlie immediately after he goes down turning and not running for his life, but turning to film where they're going to pull Charlie out. That's weird. Um, that was strange. Um, the fact again, that they just yanked Charlie off the ground. He's got a neck wound, obviously an injury to his neck. There's no head and neck attention whatsoever. And they just drag him off with his neck, literally dangling. Um, there was the kid on the phone too. Was that Mikey McCoy? Yeah. He did. He denies being on the phone. Uh, he says he was plugging his ears, but there's also footage of him way off in the back and he's still doing this, you know, is he still plugging his ears or is he have a phone in one hand and he's plugging the other ear so he can hear better. Um, you know, Frank Turk saying he was on FaceTime with his son, his son's in his thirties. Why is he on FaceTime in the middle of a Wednesday watching take questions on transgender violence? What a weird thing to watch in the middle of the day. Um, and the video footage behind him doesn't look like he's on FaceTime. It looks like his screen's black. So what is he watching? Um, and, and lest you say, maybe you can't see it from video. He is on FaceTime earlier and you can see the FaceTime screen. So why can't we see the FaceTime screen now that you claim you're on FaceTime? Just way too many weird things that popped up every step of the way. And, um, you know, the conclusion I draw is it's weird for a reason. Yeah. Have you had a chance to speak to anybody, whether it's in the family, around the family, friends, people that would have been, had access to his body or whatever over the next 24 hours? Have you had a chance to speak to any of them about observations they had? Charlie's body? Of his body, of the people around him, when the family came in, what reactions there? I don't, I don't like it. I don't want to talk about that. Okay. So maybe, but you don't want to talk about that. Okay. No problem. And then the, the whole paving over the entire thing a couple of days later, you know, again, not a cop optics. That's where we get the term cover up from, right? You cover up, you literally covered it up. You covered up the crime scene. Like, is there any explanation for that? That is even reasonably decent. I thought, I thought there might be. And then Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch did a public records request and got a bunch of text messages about the crime scene that took place the next morning. Okay. And the next morning they were already talking about digging it up, like inside of 24 hours. It seemed like I may be wrong on the exact timing, but it was the next day. They're already talking about digging it up. The, they didn't just dig it up. I mean, they dug up like 10 inches of soil and got rid of it. Is there a reason to do, and they did that before having a paving contractor. So who could come in and put down the pavers, but is there a reason to do that? I don't know, man. I I've never run a university where someone's been shot and killed on campus. Um, it's, you know, he bled a lot. It's possible. They thought it's a biologic hazard. Um, Oh, come on. You can, you can block that off. You could block it off and they did block it off. It was blocked off for a long time. Um, you know, and you, it rains and you have sprinklers and you could, you have hoses and there are, you know, you don't pave over every crime scene. So lots of crime scenes take place in America every day. Maybe they were worried he had HIV. Yeah, it could be. That's good. It could be. I'm going to pick it up. You'd know something about that. Not a, uh, not a typical, uh, route of contraction, but, um, but no, I mean, you're asking me for any reason, maybe any reason could be, they didn't want people out there to do it. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't there walking around on charlie's blood or where he died and so you put down pavers to out of out of respect out of you know whatever but i i don't i don't see it yeah i mean it doesn't make sense to me it looks like you're covering up a crime scene yeah joseph covered the coberger case a lot out in what was that in idaho and he was even saying back then how much how pissed off he was they raised that house like a couple months later yeah and they did it because it was in the middle of like a bunch of college housing where a bunch of kids were still going to school and it was obviously a very traumatic event and like it was a couple months later though he was pissed about that and this is like a couple days later yeah they're doing this just block it off it's just it's a public assassination like it that i've never been able to get around like what what the fuck was i can't either um they did the same thing at parkland high school they did the same thing as sandy hook uh it's interesting that the the school in littleton colorado that kicked off the school shooting craze back in was it 99 uh harris and clebold columb uh columbine i couldn't think of the name of the school um it's interesting that school's still there yeah uh they didn't knock it down yeah wasn't it parkland the one where that where they kept stuff so preserved maybe i'm thinking the wrong one they kept it so preserved though that the jury was able to visit it and it was as if nothing had happened there uh maybe i don't know uh there was one of they they did that correctly and it's like yeah yeah i i think it's interesting i mean um you know they they've they've other famous cases they've redone the crime scenes they did it at the the bundy address where allegedly oj simpson uh killed ron goldman and nicole brown they've they've redesigned that they've they've redone that but that was what a decade later right decade and a half later right uh certainly after the trial yeah that's fine yeah yeah so i mean at the scene yeah there's a there was a lot of weird stuff um that took place at the scene i'm still weirded out by the fact that mikey mccoy and danny phillip were both wearing backpacks on either side of charlie kirk when their car was like 10 feet away put your backpack in the car it's blocked off you've got it blocked off with police tape and gates why are you walking around in 91 degree heat and in long sleeves and a backpack but what would what would the suspiciousness of them having a backpack be like i don't know i don't know i don't know i don't know i don't know i'm just saying it's weird like put your backpack down no one else was wearing backpacks on the team they're the only two and they were positioned basically equidistant with charlie making almost like a little triangle with charlie i i don't know why that is how long from him walking up from behind when he got out of the car to walk up there and did the hats and then sat down how long was it approximately from then until he got shot i i heard 17 minutes and 28 seconds but i could be wrong maybe that's maybe maybe it was a minute or two longer i don't know why that number's coming to my head it was quick yeah i'm a backpack guy like i i take it places i could see me like accidentally like leaving it on and just chilling there but you don't accidentally leave it you showed up in a car you grabbed it out of the car and put it on your back right because i went to i got to a new place i don't i'm not as aware of my surroundings i take the backpack out of out of the car i don't know where the car is going while i'm here maybe it's sitting here maybe it's you know what's going sitting right there it's 10 feet away yeah but i would probably take it i would probably take my backpacks i'll allow that one i'm gonna push back i'll allow it yeah i'd probably take my back that's just me yeah um but i mean i look at things like that i think it's weird um i think it's weird that that uh nate walker in the immediate aftermath was picked up on video upstairs i mean this is the guy who was carrying charlie's binders and he's you know uh helping i don't even know why he's there he's only been working there a month or so i think but he he shows up and he's helping charlie with his binders and he has a little passenger bag with him and he's like i don't and then a minute or so after the the event everything's chaotic and and adam bartholomew from life is driving youtube channel is live streaming and he's flipping his camera around and nate walker's up on the roof like why is nate walker on the roof what's he doing up there where was he was he taking a leak you know i maybe it was innocent but i think this is where silence really works against tp usa because in in a situation like that the first time somebody asked a question about why was baron coleman doing this i was like why was baron coleman doing this i'd say well baron cole was doing this because of that's right you know i drank four cups of coffee on the way in and i had to go to the bathroom nothing to hide the event had started i'd already done my job i'm wandering around campus yeah you know what are you talking about um but the silence when these issues are raised they pick and choose which ones they're going to address and when they choose to address it they do it in such a condescending nasty mean way that it it's it's like a it's like a cornered dog you know like stop stop attacking us these are legitimate questions a murder you know a lot of a lot of people the reason you have a job the reason all these people at tp usa are employed they're 700 plus employees the reason there's four different tp usa organizations the reason there's a podcast the reason you guys are all at that event that day is because a lot of people really love charlie kirk really deeply loved him they were willing to travel a long way to go see him uh they turned out of college campuses they turned out in arenas they sold out places they bought his books they made him a multiple time best-selling author these questions are coming out of love answer the freaking questions you know answer the questions these people want to know why charlie's dead and you you sitting back and acting high and mighty and being condescending and being, uh, acting like you're above everybody else. And you don't have to answer anything. And anyone asking questions, evil or corrupt or demonic or, or has bad motives, you know, that reflects so poorly on those people. That's, that's, that's not, that's not the posture to take when someone that was truly loved by a lot of people, by millions of people is tragically died and it looks weird. Answer the questions. I completely agree. It is a case study and PR disaster that will probably make an actual case study at some of these colleges. And when they studied in business school in the future, and it should, but what are, how do you think the prosecution is going to go about proving their case at trial? I don't think they can. You don't think they can. I don't think you can prove a case unless they're sitting back on evidence that unless they gave all of their weakest evidence at the probable cause hearing, I don't think they can. Um, you're going to have a hard time convincing people that figure running. On the roof had a 30 out six in his hand. Um, keep in mind at trial, you're not going to be able to get away with this clipping up videos and not showing us everything. Uh, the probable cause hearing, they were sort of the architects of the evidence at the criminal trial. The defense gets to introduce evidence. That's right. And so you can't show us the purported Tyler Robinson walked to the top of the stairs and then jumped the camera forward a minute, four seconds. What was he doing for that minute? Four seconds. Did he talk to someone? Did he text someone? Was he on the phone? Did he, did he raise his hands and, and signaled it? Was somebody, did he flash a flag? Like what was he doing? Um, you're not going to be able to, to get away with this. Oh, we think he ran into the woods. Well, why, why do you think he ran into the woods? Where's the rest of the camera footage that shows that he even ran towards the woods? Did he cross the street? Did he walk down this way? You know, when do you next see him? Do you ever see him again? Uh, you told us he changed clothes in the woods. Why do you think he changed clothes in the woods? You know, what evidence do you have for that? You're not going to be able to get away with all this stuff at a, at a actual trial. You're not going to be able to get away with, Oh, here's a guy in a maroon shirt. We think it's Tyler because he drove in and a challenger. Well, that's not the only challenger that's ever been sold. That's not the only red shirt that's ever been sold. Give us more. Give us way more than that. Uh, Oh, he went and ate Chick-fil-A, but we're not going to show you any footage of him eating Chick-fil-A. We're not going to show you a receipt that proves he was back on campus. Just trust me, bro. He was there. No, not gonna be able to pull that off either. Um, there's so much of this that they're only able to, to get away with right now, because the defense was limited on their ability to push back on it. They couldn't really turn it into a trial, uh, because that's not the standard at the probable cause hearing. The prosecution is the architect of the probable cause hearing. And so it, it'll be, it'll be really interesting to see if the text messages can hold up under scrutiny. It'll be interesting to see how Lance Twiggs actually does on a stand. He's obviously expected to be horrific or he would have been there. Um, so we can anticipate his, his testimony will be terrible. Uh, it'll be interesting to see if the process, if the defense calls Ms. Noble, the lady who saw the bald man with the three passengers, I would call her. Yeah. If assuming she'll talk to me ahead of time and tell me why she thinks that, and if not, I mean, you can't get her statement and you're going to have to call her as a witness, but you know, assuming she'll stick to that statement and if not impeach her with a statement. Okay. You're saying you didn't see a bald man. Do you remember making a statement to the police? I mean, you might not be able to introduce it as evidence, but you can impeach her with it. Um, there's, there's a lot that the prosecution is not going to be able to, to, um, to overcome. I think, for example, they lost him on camera at the most critical juncture. They admit they lost him. Which juncture was that? Well, you, you said that you thought you saw Tyler Robinson in the hallway, walking up the stairs. And then they say he disappears from camera. And all of a sudden we have what looked like a trained assassin appear on the roof and military crawl into position, holding a non-existent 30 got six and lay down and take a, a non-existent shot. How do we even know that's the same guy? You know, let's say we can say that's Tyler Robinson in the stairwell. It's not illegal to be in the stairwell. There's nothing illegal about being in the stairwell on a public college campus. He can walk around any stairwell he wants nothing illegal about eating Chick-fil-A, nothing illegal about driving into parking lots, nothing illegal about walking around campus. So putting him on campus is really irrelevant. What the question is, who the hell was that on the roof? And if you lost Tyler Robinson from camera and you can't definitively identify the guy on the roof and it doesn't, you can't definitively identify what's in his hand and you can't identify, uh, definitively identify, he took a shot. You're going to have trouble proving your case. One more piece of evidence. And I assume the defense would track this person down. I think I could, if I had a half a mind to do it, there was somebody who put on Instagram, a video from directly below the Losey center, like seconds after the alleged shot seconds after the crowd is still fleeing and running crazy. I've seen this video. Yeah. And they said the shot came from down there. If there's one person in that entire facility who would be able to put a shot on the roof, a person standing directly below the roof. Right. Um, there's, there's a lot of problems with this case and it puts me in grave fear for Tyler Robinson's life. Because if all the hopes and dreams of putting this case to bed rest on us having to believe Tyler Robinson did it, you can't take this case to trial. It's a disaster. It's an absolute disaster. And the more they come and tell you that it's definitive and it's bulletproof and pardon expression. Um, that, that it's, it's open and shut. The more they howl about that, the more I believe that they don't believe it either. They, they agree with me that this case is lousy and they feel like they have to go out and put the cell job on it in order to convince people. It's not, I don't think people buy it. I don't think a jury will buy it. You, you really strike me as a guy who wants the truth here, just like you said. And like, I've been extremely impressed, obviously, like watching some of your streams, catching up on that. Cause you've been doing that for a long time talking with you today and getting to see it. face to face, like how you lay it out, talk with you on the phone and going through it like you're an affable guy. You're extremely smart. You dig into all these things and you're asking questions that to subtweet what you said a few minutes ago are questions that people of all backgrounds deserve to know about this because it was such a public, horrific assassination. But then particularly the people who were fans of this guy deserve to get answers to these things to get closure, if you can even get that on on on a case like this. But, you know, I think it's I think it's a mess. I think they're what you're laying out makes a really good case that there is a strong possibility. Tyler Robinson is a patsy and like he didn't actually do this. Do you ever worry about if even if there were a bigger story there behind him doing it, if in fact he did do it, that like you and some other prominent people, whether it be Candace Owens or the handful of people who are really going at this, you guys would be responsible. For. The actual killer of Charlie Kirk going free by poking so many holes in this case. No, that that doesn't cross my mind at all. The foundation of the the foundation of the American criminal justice system is that it's better that that guilty people go free than innocent people go to prison. It should be an extremely high bar for the prosecution to be able to put somebody in prison to deprive them of liberty or their life. And if they can't build a better case, then he needs to go free. If this is the only case they have, if this is the best they've got, then then you can't convict him because it puts everyone else at jeopardy. Put the system to the test. Yeah, it puts everyone at jeopardy. I've represented some really horrific people. And on the criminal side, wouldn't you like to do that? Yeah, well, I'll say horrific people. I've represented some people accused of some really horrific crimes, really horrific crimes. I didn't have any moral issue whatsoever with representing them because it's it's better to keep the system honest. You know, if Julian Dory doesn't want to be falsely accused of a crime, we need a robust criminal justice system that can ensure the only way Julian Dory goes to prison is if he committed a crime. And if you committed a crime and you get away with it, that's that's the cost of keeping the system to a very high standard. I don't think he did it. I'm open to the fact that he did it. But if they can't convict him, that's their problem, not mine. Yeah, my friend Brian McMonacle was on the show. Back in episode 115, he's a really prominent defense attorney. He's the guy that got Bill Cosby off and then quit. And then Bill Cosby got convicted. That's a poor choice of words. Yeah, that is a very poor choice of words. I don't think he was Bill Cosby's type. I don't think he's the only one that got Bill Cosby off. But he I walked right into that one pause. But he said you can run the tape on that episode. He describes it the same exact way. And I and I believe him on how he looks at it from like a moral standpoint and constitutional standpoint. And that's what this country is built on. So I think that's I think that's a great answer. But last thing before we get out of here and then we'll be doing another podcast to stay tuned for that one. That's gonna be really good. But, you know, you do have security and I guess I understand that as well. But, you know, are you are you fearful, I guess, of your life and the work you're doing, being a little too public and asking a little bit too many questions? Maybe people don't want to ask. Fearful? No, I don't want to say fearful. I'm careful. There's a lot riding on this, more than the the jeopardy of Tyler Robinson. If it wasn't Tyler Robinson, we talked about earlier. It's a it's a binary choice. It either was Tyler Robinson alone on the Loci Center with a 30-06 or it's a multi-agency cover up that could be international in scope and goes to the very highest levels of security. And I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. vault and that's the concern that's the concern that if the case against tyler robinson erodes then people will come to the same conclusion i come to and if people come to that conclusion then the people who are leading the charge to investigate this uh they become they become a problem they become an issue um and so i i think you know being careful is is a responsible thing to do i've got eight children i've got a grandchild i've got a wife um i'm the sole provider for all of them it's a big house yeah um and so it's a uh it's it's something i i approach soberly and seriously and and you know i've got i've got plans to be around a long time and um you look healthy thank you and i'm and i'm i'm happy and i've got plans for next week and next month and next year and 10 years from now that's right i didn't see him experiment with belts before no no no i don't even wear belts we're doing um don't own a belt is that your rule so no i mean it's just uh you know it's a it's a sad statement that anyone should be fearful or or have to be careful um for covering a new story like that's really sad that's a sad commentary it's a sad commentary is where we are um but when you when you when you hear people on the other side cheerleading the the way they are for um for the conviction of tyler robinson in the absence of any evidence it raises the obvious question why um and it's the why that that causes me to be careful well you're doing some really impressive work and it's also you know done in in a way like you have to balance also being entertainment entertaining but also asking the right questions and being respectful of the process too and and doing that in in the right tone i think you do a great job with that so i think for people that haven't seen baron's channel that's gonna be linked right there you can go subscribe but you and i will be doing that podcast joe scott morgan will be coming out the same week as this one this one will be first that one will be an episode or two later in the same week so you guys can check that out it'll be a fun conversation but thanks for doing round one right here appreciate you having me all right everybody else you know what it is give it a thought get back to me peace what's up guys thanks so much for watching the video if you have not subscribed please hit that subscribe button before you leave as well as leaving a like on the video and i'll see you in the next one bye bye it's a huge huge help you can join my patreon via the link in the description and you can also join my clipping community via the discord link down below see you for the next episode this episode sponsored by she's birdie you lock the hotel room door then check it again and maybe one more time because even the nicest room can feel unfamiliar at night that's why she's birdie created birdie box with she's birdie you can bring peace of mind with you birdie box is a portable device that can be used to bring peace of mind with you birdie box is a portable device travel door alarm for hotels dorms airbnbs and anywhere you stay away from home just attach it to the door frame switch it on and if someone opens the door birdie box blasts a loud siren and flashing alarm to alert you and everyone nearby because the best part of travel isn't worrying it's sleeping soundly birdie box from she's birdie locking in peace of mind wherever you stay for safer more confident travel visit she's birdie.com that's s-h-e-s-b-i-r-d-i-e.com