DAMNING TPUSA 👀 UVU Independent Review for Charlie Kirk's assassination just dropped: 1. TPUSA and its security team refused to cooperate with the independent review “Despite repeated outreach attempts, the Project Team did not receive responses from the following individuals or other representatives of their organizations.” 2. TPUSA INSISTED on the outdoor Fountain Courtyard after UVU raised control and safety concerns “several key event-security decisions were deferred to the TPUSA field representative even though UVU staff members raised concerns, including concerns related to holding the event in the outdoor Fountain Courtyard area and using TPUSA’s ticketing process. TPUSA preferred to hold the event in the Fountain Courtyard and use its own ticketing system rather than the University’s system. Those decisions placed the event in an area that was more difficult to control…” 3. TPUSA kept ticketing and then never issued or checked tickets “TPUSA preferred … to use its own ticketing system rather than the University’s system. Those decisions … limited UVU’s ability to obtain reliable, real-time information regarding anticipated attendance and crowd size.” 4. TPUSA’s planning questionnaire said there were no safety or security concerns “The questionnaire projected approximately 600 attendees, described the event as primarily student-focused with some potential public interest, represented no risk factors/safety/security concerns or need for emergency medical services, and offered to connect UVUPD with TPUSA’s head of security.” 5. Security coordination with UVU was late, thin, and never became a real joint plan Chief Long had to chase a contact after MEAC: “When he did not hear from Crofts or a member of the TPUSA security team following the MEAC meeting, Chief Long attempted to follow up… On September 2, he emailed a staff member in the University’s Clubs Office seeking contact information for TPUSA’s security representative because no member of the TPUSA security team had contacted him following his request to Crofts.” 6. TPUSA’s protection detail did not request the briefing the report calls essential “The absence of a formal pre-event briefing and coordinated walk-through with Brian Harpole, Dan Flood, and the TPUSA security team was a critical missed opportunity.” “The Project Team finds it particularly significant that an on-site pre-event briefing was not requested by the TPUSA protection detail.” 👀 7. TPUSA security focused on one walkway, not a full elevated-position plan The report says TPUSA’s documented concern was the Hall of Flags walkway above the canopy, not a broader rooftop/line-of-sight assessment: “These text exchanges revealed the primary security focus for TPUSA was the Hall of Flags outdoor pedestrian walkway above the canopy.” 8. Harpole’s later public account conflicted with the documentary record The report states that Harpole’s podcast version of who chose the venue does not match the evidence: “Harpole further stated that the venue location was selected by UVU and that UVU told TPUSA, ‘Nope, this is where you have to have it.’ This was one of the primary reasons the Project Team sought to speak directly with Harpole, since this particular statement and a number of others Harpole made conflicted with what the Project Team learned from reviewing evidence and conducting numerous interviews… UVU had expressed concerns about the outdoor location, including during the August 25 MEAC meeting, but ultimately agreed to TPUSA’s requested venue location when TPUSA representative Maycee Crofts insisted on it. … the initial e-mail request from TPUSA to UVU on July 10, 2025, also specifically requested that the event be held at the Fountain Courtyard.” The report also notes Harpole said his team had drones but did not use them, and that the podcast “did not include any discussion of whether Harpole’s team worked with UVUPD to address other elevated roof area concerns near the venue."