TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

A person confronts a group arriving by bus to protest Trump in Washington D.C. The person accuses the group of being an "AstroTurfed" crowd, implying they are not an authentic, grassroots movement. The person questions if they know what International Workers' Rights Day is, calling it "Socialist day." The confrontation escalates with insults exchanged. The person threatens physical violence.

We saw a man crawling on a roof with a rifle while Trump was speaking. We alerted the police and Secret Service, but they seemed unaware. Eventually, the man was shot by the Secret Service. The speaker is certain the shots came from the man on the roof.

They describe a monitoring and disruption program with a dedicated apparatus. They have 40 analysts working full time, seven days a week, twenty four hours a day, monitoring extremists online across platforms including social media, messaging apps, video games, cryptocurrency, podcasts, short form video, Wikipedia, and LLMs. They monitor these people and share the intelligence with the FBI. They are monitoring left-wing radicals like the DSA, antiwar activists, and pro-Palestine extremists; right-wing extremists like white supremacists and armed militia groups; political Islamists and Christian nationalists, all of them. They also emphasize training, stating they are the largest trainer of law enforcement in America, training 20,000 officers every year.

We have a COVID online team that investigates and monitors individuals displaying concerning behavior related to conspiracy theories, anti-government sentiments, anti-police views, and COVID-19 vaccination. If you know someone like this, please inform us directly or through Crimestoppers. However, we do not consider this incident as domestic terrorism. The Trane family members have shown anti-government and anti-police sentiments in their social media posts. We will analyze the posts, identify other contributors, and determine their location.

Speaker 0: Number one, we measure and track. Number two, we monitor and disrupt. We have a whole apparatus. I have 40 analysts working full time, seven days a week, twenty four hours a day, monitoring extremists. We monitor them online, social media, messaging apps, video games, cryptocurrency, podcasts, short form video, Wikipedia, LLMs. We monitor these people and we share the intelligence with the FBI. You saw last month, you heard about the thing that happened at Wilshire Boulevard Temple. Our analysts investigated what happened. They said they were Koreatown for Palestine, this group of people. They weren't. We were able to ascertain they were from a group called the Turtle Island Liberation Front. Turtle Island is how, like, left wing activists refer to The United States. They don't call it America. They call it Turtle Island. Like the Iranians call it, Iranians call it the Zionist entity, or they only call by its name. The Turtle Island Liberation Front, we gave them a whole dossier. Who are what is Turtle Island Liberation Front? What are their ideas, their goals? Who are they? We identified the people who are in the synagogue. This was on Wednesday, December 10. On Monday, December 15, this is gonna ring a bell. Kashmattel announced they cracked a terror ring where they arrested four people who are playing New Year's Eve bombings, Turtle Island Liberation Front. At least one of the people I know for certain was in the building at Wilshire Boulevard Temple vandalizing it and disrupting the event. So we're monitoring left wing radicals like the DSA and the anti war crazies and the pro Palestine crazies. We're monitoring right wing extremists like white supremacists, armed militia groups. We're monitoring political Islamists and Christian nationalists, all of them. And then we train. We're the largest trainer of law enforcement in America. Extremism hate. We train 20,000 officers every year.

A woman in a pink MAGA shirt shouted that a person had voted for Joe Biden, using a racial slur. The small crowd of about 20 people joined in, yelling derogatory remarks. This was the first time I had ever been called such a derogatory term while wearing my Capitol police officer uniform.

Speaker 0 raises a series of pointed questions and concerns about FBI and government actions surrounding the monitoring and reporting of online activity and potential threats, urging a demand for answers: - Why did the FBI present only early pro-Trump posts and hide the anti-Trump phase? Two answers are implied: under Biden, the existence of a narrative, and a need to ask who was involved in that decision and why it happened. - After the election, why did the FBI continue to toe that line, and who made that decision? - The speaker notes that authorities are monitoring people who ask how to build bombs or evade assassination scenes, and asks how such monitoring relates to successful assassinations and the future locations of political actors; suggests an algorithmic tie and notification so someone is watching. - Why did they ignore Crooks’s really unbelievable threats? Why were ordinary Americans arrested for memes, while Crooks’s behavior appeared to be ignored? - Why did intelligence agencies monitoring extremism miss a kid openly fantasizing about assassinations, who connected with a Swedish individual allegedly part of a large Nazi movement in Sweden? - Why was the scene cleaned prematurely? Why did every digital trace of his political shift get kept out of public discussion? Why did authorities claim he had almost no footprint when, in fact, the footprint seemed large but scrubbed? - The speaker notes a pattern: every single mistake by the FBI and government seems to point toward ignorance, negligence, hiding inconvenient data, and shaping a political narrative; questions whether the pattern indicates incompetence or intentional action. - Is this incompetence or something more problematic? The speaker says they aren’t asserting a conspiracy but emphasize something feels wrong and that the official story is hard to believe. They ask why the government that supposedly monitors everything would become blind, deaf, and mute when a presidential assassin emerges on their radar. - The question is posed non-partisan: under different presidents, why would the narrative stay the same if the government can see everything? What does that imply about the FBI, DOJ, and CIA—whether they are lying, incompetent, or selectively monitoring—since any of these possibilities should be unsettling. - The FBI and mainstream media, including MSNBC, are said to have referenced leaks from Crooks’s social media indicating pro-Trump and anti-immigration stances, while being described as having almost no online footprint; Crooks reportedly had Discord, Snapchat, and an active YouTube presence, with violent 2019 YouTube comments about decapitating government officials, followed by a shift. - The speaker asserts the iceberg is deep and suggests a broader pattern of concerns about oversight, control, and the potential overreach or misalignment of intelligence agencies, with a friend claiming the CIA may be completely out of control and implying limits to accountability, while noting it could extend beyond the CIA. Overall, the remarks center on questioning the completeness, transparency, and motivation behind FBI monitoring, narrative shaping, data handling, and the handling of Crooks’s threats and online footprint, while expressing concern about systemic issues within intelligence agencies.

I'm here with Enrique Torre, founder of the Proud Boys. I was just arrested outside the capital because a woman was following us, even saying she'd follow me to the hotel. During a press conference, I felt like I was hit with a needle while she hovered over me. I grabbed her phone and tossed it. Capitol police picked me up instead of her and booked me for simple assault. I'm pretty sure the charges will be dropped. It's nonsense lawfare, and it won't stand.

This is fundamentally a case of widespread domestic terrorism with the purpose of intimidation, harming innocent people. The focus needs to be on the people organizing and paying for these attacks and protests, not just the foot soldiers throwing Molotov cocktails. The president has made it clear that those paying for and organizing these violent attacks will be pursued. Attorney General Bondi has said the same thing. The organizers, the generals, will be targeted. They are known. Prosecution will hopefully be for RICO and an organized criminal enterprise, which carries more serious penalties. The organizers and pushers of mass violence will go to prison for a very long time.

According to the speaker, there were undercover FBI agents present at the January 6th event, as confirmed by the FBI Director's testimony. The speaker initially didn't know about their presence but later learned that there were allegedly 18 operatives in the crowd. This was unusual compared to past events where intelligence was handled differently. The speaker also mentioned that Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) personnel were likely present as well. The speaker described the number of law enforcement and intelligence agencies in the crowd as significant and unprecedented, especially for a hate event in Washington DC.

We have a specialized team, the COVID online team, that investigates and monitors individuals displaying concerning behavior related to anti-government, anti-police, and COVID-19 vaccination conspiracy theories. If you know someone exhibiting such behavior, please inform us through the police or Crimestoppers. However, we do not consider this a domestic terrorism case currently. The three trained family members have shown sentiments against the government and police through their social media posts. We will examine the other individuals posting similar material, the owners of those sites, and their locations.

Speaker 1 says they are retiring by declaring themselves a FIFA member, citing risk in being a "professional political act activist" and involvement in events like "blackouts" and the violence. They avoid naming others due to risk and say there were pre-event "meetings beforehand" and "text messages" and "Facebook messages," and that their Facebook page was taken down for hate speech before investigators looked into it. When asked about arrests, they say, "Yes. I know for sure we have over 100 members... currently incarcerated because of this event." They add, "That's a pretty large number. I know that the FBI's arrested, they're going on 1,000 people."

"Beginning in September 2017, I took over the intelligence branch for the the police department." "Beginning in July 2019 there was a big First Amendment demonstration plant for Washington, D. C. Called Demand Free Speech." "I was put in touch with Enrique Tarrio, and he provided me the social media posts that, where the threats were made." "We drilled down on it, and that was my first encounter with Enrique." "So he and I developed a working relationship where he would contact me whenever he came to Washington, D. C. And would provide me with information such as what hotels they were planning on staying at, where they were planning on demonstrating, if they were planning on any marches, their march routes." "Your role was to ensure the safety of everyone, whether it was other law enforcement, it was Proud Boys, it was BLM, it was Antifa, it was the general population." "I was providing it to all the federal agencies who are assisting us, FBI, Capitol Police, Secret Service." "And at no time did he ever lie to me."

The speaker says they “followed the money” to what they call the “protest industrial complex,” “Riot Inc.,” and identified a network of NGOs funding the ecosystem. They state the funding extends beyond the Soros/Open Society network to other funding networks, including the Arabella Funding Network, the Tides Funding Network, Neville Roy Singham and his network, and “Foreign Cash,” along with “big, left wing” funders, including non-citizens. The speaker names Mr. Hans Georg Wiese of Switzerland as an example of such funders. The speaker presents three “money facts” about Riot Inc. First, they describe Riot Inc. as having divisions similar to a corporation: not only an “Antifa boots on the ground” division, but also PR divisions, marketing divisions, and a “very well funded legal division” to “get these boots on the ground back on the streets as quickly as possible,” alongside the investors previously mentioned. Second, they claim they identified “dozens of radical organizations” that received more than $100,000,000 from Riot Inc. investors, including “lawyer groups” that advocate for calling “good honest Americans fascists.” Third, they claim that more than $100,000,000 in U.S. taxpayer funding flowed into these funding networks, including at least $4,000,000 to “these very groups themselves.” They cite an Atlanta event called “Stop Cop City,” saying more than 60 rioters were charged with domestic terrorism and that these groups received money from both “the billionaire class” and “taxpayer money” for that. The speaker also claims that this money helps fund decentralized crowdfunding platforms used by groups such as “Antifa,” the “John Brown Gun Club of Elm Fork” (linked by the speaker to an attack on an ice facility), and the “Socialist Rifle Association.” They add that groups without LLCs or EIN numbers can still be paid through these crowdfunding platforms. The speaker closes by saying they will keep “following the money” and thanks the audience for leadership.

The transcript describes activists and protest activity as coordinated rather than “organic.” It claims the same people who were seen on the streets burning things in 2020 later shift to being “pro Hamas protesters,” and, within forty eight hours of Maduro’s arrest, appear outside the courthouse with pre printed signs demanding his release. It also alleges they perform actions described as “ICE stuff,” including attacking ICE agents. The speaker states there is “nothing organic about it,” saying the activity is “funded” and “organized,” with Cuba presented as part of that network and “in some cases, a critical part of that network.” The transcript further says the network will be “weaponize[d] against us” and that participants talk openly about using it to pressure American policymakers not only in the United States but “all over the world.” The speaker says Marco Rubio references organizations that are organizing and funding street protests and mass protests across America and that this also takes place around the world. The transcript lists protest types said to be covered by these groups: the 2020 protests, pro Hamas, pro Palestine, pro Maduro for Venezuela, and anti ICE protests. It claims these groups “are the ones that are organizing and funding all those protests,” and describes the activism as “coordinated, funded activism” spanning multiple issues and locations. Specific groups are named as examples said to have been caught funding and organizing street mass protests in America. These include Code Pink and People’s Forum, along with references to “a ton more groups.” The transcript also names the Democratic Socialist of America and the Party for Socialism and Liberation. It adds that some of these organizations’ names should be familiar because, according to the speaker, they post on Facebook with their signs whenever mass protests occur, and “it makes total sense” that they are organizing and funding them. The closing reiterates the claim that, as Marco Rubio says, “none of this is organic,” describing it as “highly funded and organized.”

Right wing domestic terrorists are targeting us and plan to maintain power even after the president leaves office. We must prioritize diversity, inclusion, and community protection. I have to leave to testify on impeachment, something I've been advocating for since this president was elected. Thank you.

Confidential informants, whether registered, unregistered, or volunteers, or even FBI agents, were used to gather information on groups like the Proud Boys planning to come to DC. It is likely that the agents mentioned in the Proud Boys case were actual FBI agents.

I spotted a guy with a sign that seemed to threaten CEOs. I asked him if Julone, or Luigi, was his hero, considering the message he was putting out. He didn't want to talk, but I pressed, asking who his hero politician was. I asked the group to raise their right hands. I asked if their cause involved killing CEOs because that's what the sign implied. They called me an extremist while holding up pro-Luigi signs. They seemed angry and exposed. They started blocking their original sign with an "F Trump" sign. I pointed out they didn't want to answer if they thought killing Elon Musk was a good idea. Then, they began taking pictures of me. I simply asked if they were cool with a sign that threatened the president's life, and they freaked out. All I wanted was an answer on whether they thought threatening the president was appropriate.

There is a question about whether we are heading towards a Civil War. On January 6th, there was a large crowd, which I believe was the biggest I've ever spoken to. Some people in that crowd described it as a beautiful day filled with love and unity, but also with a strong hatred for what has been done to our country. The level of passion and hatred is unprecedented, and it could be a dangerous combination. Thank you.

The speaker asserts that white supremacists who came with planned, premeditated threats were not peaceful, and states, “I don’t have to be peaceful. I don’t owe anybody peace.” They reference a sign described as “Piece of shit. That sign.” A few weeks later, felony indecent exposure charges were filed against this registered sex offender.

Speaker 0 describes a situation where some individuals “gum felt empowered and emboldened enough to put this picture of me up to try to threaten and intimidate me,” adding that they didn’t succeed because “I signed up for this.” The person who posted the picture “said a bunch of terrible things, not just against me, but against a lot of groups and individuals who, by the way, was arrested today in Wisconsin.” The speaker’s point is that if this person feels empowered or safe enough to threaten them, what would they do to “a kid” or “a Jewish family walking down the street?” The speaker attributes this behavior to the “normalization of this,” describing how people watch such acts on television and feel empowered to imitate them. They argue that while the aggressor may think they can act, they cannot: “a, you can't.” They extend the concern to someone in law enforcement, asking, “if you think you can do it to somebody that's in law enforcement, again, what are you gonna do in an alley or in a street to a Jewish family or a kid walking down the street?” The message is a firm prohibition: “We say no. We're drawing the line.”

I will ask the Justice Department and the President to address the potential threat of violence if he loses. I am concerned about right-wing groups connected to him training in the hills and planning attacks on communities.

Speaker 1 stated they will do everything in their power to protect Seattle residents from anyone who comes to the city with the intention to hurt them or inhibit their first amendment rights. They believe they will probably go to jail and be in prison because the current administration has threatened to jail politicians and has done so.

"Our intelligence indicates that these people are organized." "They're getting more and more people on their team as far as attacking officers, and they're making plans to ambush them and to kill them." "We have specific officers and agents that have bounties that have been put out on their heads." "It's been $2,000 to kidnap them, dollars 10,000 to kill them." "They've released their pictures." "They've sent them between their networks, and it's an extremely dangerous situation and unprecedented." "We 've put protective detail around those individuals, changed some of our operations to keep our officers safe." "But make no mistake, this isn't just about protesting free speech or that they don't like that people out here are upholding the law of our country." "They're actually going out there and saying, kill these people and we'll give you this much money to do it."

Speaker 1 says a case described by the FBI shows a group moving from being “strangers on TikTok” to “operational planning within three months” on a combined total budget of $1,300. Speaker 1 says the FBI found out about the plot on June 10 and had it “wrapped up within four days,” calling it “a good OSINT puzzle” that is “perfectly wrapped.” Speaker 1 then summarizes the FBI announcement: the FBI “thwarted this attack” at the UFC Freedom 250 match at the White House that took place over the past weekend, which Speaker 1 says kicked off the country’s 250th anniversary celebrations. According to Speaker 1’s description of the FBI case filings released that day, a group calling themselves the Vanguard of the Old found each other on TikTok in March. Speaker 1 says they then moved into encrypted messaging apps including Signal and Telegram and were allegedly planning a coordinated attack targeting government officials and wealthy attendees. Speaker 1 also says the FBI chose to unseal the documents, and that Kash Patel was praised on the record for the FBI’s “rapid response.” Speaker 1 notes Kash Patel was “sitting front row” at the event while taking credit for protection of the weekend. Speaker 1 says the grievances listed in the court documents allege they are anti-government, anti-APAC, anti-capitalist elites, and anti-data centers, described as “fringe beliefs of a minor few.” Speaker 1 adds that these grievances are “things that millions of people are openly talking about” online and that they have been listed as motivations in a single federal terror case. Speaker 1 says an Eskridge affidavit includes a statement that Eskridge was preparing his residence “to be a safe house and making a bunker under the floorboards of his shed,” and Speaker 1 remarks that only one other person had used the word “shed” in a similar context. Speaker 1 then provides a parallel described by Speaker 0 about a “massive underground complex” under a military construction ballroom, where the ballroom becomes a “shed” for what is being built under the military, including “from drones.” Speaker 1 says if the government needed to work the case quickly, it would need “a pretty serious tech stack,” including tools to scrape TikTok content, analyze seized phones, identify “18 unknown people” from encrypted chat fragments, and enable intelligence sharing across four states’ agencies. Speaker 1 then references Oracle and Eris Labs, saying Oracle partnered with an AI company called Eris Labs that “turns user-generated content into searchable military intelligence,” and that Oracle announced the partnership on June 4, about six days before the FBI discovered the plot. Speaker 1 says Oracle would bring the tech stack to a Defense Tech Summit in Brussels on June 25. Speaker 1 concludes by saying there are still 18 suspects at large and that the “sales pitch starts on June 25,” adding that it will be seen which gets resolved first.