I saw the original interview online before it got scrubbed. Regarding my ability to sift through facts, I’ve got decades of investigative interviewing experience, and have had to shake out the truth or as close to it as possible from the b.s. since I was on my high school newspaper, and then through a career in Europe, the continental U.S. and Alaska. I am looking for tone, extent to which a person might be rehearsed, consistency in internal facts presented, and the physical “tells” of truth and lying. As a final footnote, during my career in the Washington Post, when my contemporaries in the same position at the New York Times were making one galloping error after another, such that sometimes they had to note that an entire 2 full-page news graphic on the U.S. Census was all overly-massaged garbage that was nothing but errors, my work was known as not only creative but scrupulously accurate, multiply sourced, cautious. Always aware of the “Rashomon” effect and the importance of finding a keystone expert with no agenda to calibrate to. I had no corrections that I can recall in thousands of workpieces involving crushing breaking news with surrounding chaos and fog of war.
So that’s my background. It’s not neophyte.
The woman I saw interviewed spoke in Spanish about seeing “three men, maybe four” dressed in black walking through the store shooting. She was a bit shaken but spoke clearly and simply. No “tells” of being rehearsed.
A psy-op, of which there are many dozens and hundreds throughout history, would have the characteristics of “Rashomon,” one group of people seeing the psy-op as staged for consumption, as well as the controlled ancillary “manifestos” and other coordinated parts of the operation, and Ms. Quezada (and many others) seeing “behind the scenes,” going off-script and being ridiculed.
For all these “shootings,” ask first, “Cui bono?” – who benefits – and follow that trial where it leads.
EDIT TO ADD:
Almost nothing could be more bizarre than the Associated Press (hint: not some fly-by-night outfit) having its initial report discuss eyewitness testimony by Ms. Quezada, and this to be accepted by a multitude of news outlets from PBS to Texas TV stations, and then the “official narrative” veering in a VERY different direction.
It’s not as though “four guys in black” and “one guy in khaki” are “kinda sorta” roughly equivalent. You are getting into a BIZARRE level of dissonance with this shooting, such that there is very little explanation except for it being a blatant, in-your-face psy-op.
