I don't know anything about guns either, but here are my thoughts.
Assuming that there WAS a bullet that whizzed by Trump's head & nicked his ear, it must have been fired by someone actually wanting to kill him: no professional shooter, even the best in the world, could have guaranteed that a bullet that close would not kill him. It was only because Trump turned his head at the crucial moment that he survived.
So that leaves the fake blood theory as the only alternative possibility...
We know that anything at all can be faked these days - though successfully faking an assassination attempt at a live rally would take a miracle in itself.
And there were actual people killed, presumably by actual bullets (again, it is possible that this could have been faked... heck, the whole thing could have been staged by actors!... but we are entering the realms of the implausible here, IMO).
So if it was the "White Hats" who are responsible, they have to be just as psychopathic as the Black Hats (or Deep State).
So my Scientific Self will point to Occam's Razor - the principle that the simplest hypothesis which explains all the facts is most probably the correct one.
...while my Spiritual Self will believe to my dying day that this was a true miracle, a sign of Grace, a sign that Trump has been chosen by God.
And then there is the principle "By their fruits shall ye know them..."
While Trump is still Trump, with all his faults and failings, he is now talking about unity and coming together. There is a light around him, and the Republican Party itself seems to have united around Trump.
And Trump has reached out to RFK Jr, and he has chosen a VP who is anti-vaccine-mandate (though reportedly pro-vaccine himself).
While it would be nice to have a world leader who was able to call out Big Pharma and their various cons, we know it is not going to happen that way (not if that leader is going to stay alive and in power). So for myself, I'm prepared to take what I can get. I still can't quite forgive Trump for Operation Warp Speed, or for his empowering Fauci & co (which has to be poor judgement, at best, IMO, since I don't believe in 5D chess games).
It doesn't matter one iota what I think of Trump, since I don't get to vote in the US election.
And it remains to be seen how all this will play out in practice.
But for now, I am taking hope where I can find it!
That's a very interesting different take. I assumed he was forced to, or had to do so. But... thinking really hard as a devil's advocate... could a 2 year lockdown plan be realistically managed - not sure about that. But if Trump can produce a rationale for what he did, maintaining his prior view on vaccines (not positive - I think he saw Baron change), that's a good thing into the future. Trump did say he wouldn't have mandated. And brainwashed people were Desperate for a liquid gold vaccine - he had a lot of political pressure among the people (and small business) to get a vaccine out to draw an end to the whole event.
Re "successfully faking an assassination attempt at a live rally would take a miracle in itself"
I'd hope so, but I watched a video account of a guy who said he'd been at the Trump rally, in the bleachers, two rows in front of, and eight seats along from, the guy who died. He had no idea what was happening. He had an impression of something rushing past (in hindsight suggesting a bullet), saw people go down, he didn't know why, but he followed. He was too busy clearing away all of the water bottles so he could crouch low, and didn't see anything of Trump when he first looked up - security were surrounding him. Witness accounts all vary. I think they could get away with quite a lot, particularly with trauma-altered memory.
Thanks so much for the correction on the name. I'm known as the worst proof reader in the world - don't know what went wrong there. You must be the first fight fan who's read it. But on the wrestling, I recently saw a backgrounder on Dana White & Trump, and I thought Trump talked about a wrestler who picked up a guy over his head and threw him two rows back into the audience. I recall Trump laughing that it might be staged, 'but the guy's strong'. When I looked into Dana White's ambit he does run wrestling shows I assumed it was the same thing. Can you clarify? Maybe I'm remembering it wrongly?
To be more accurate, Dana White does not run "wrestling shows". He is CEO of a company that oversees mixed martial arts competitions which is quite different then the staged entertainment wrestling shows that you are thinking of. President Trump had some tongue-in-cheek fun years ago by participating in some of those shows where he had an ongoing "feud" with Vince McMahon, president of WWE. That is how he came to know Hulk Hogan and Andre the Giant that Hulk referred to in his speech at RNC. Hulk and Andre were not involved with Dana White's martial arts business. It is totally separate. Dana White and President Trump have been friends since his Trump Taj Mahal days when he sponsored Dana Whites mixed martial arts bouts. Ahh, those were the days!
Thank you so much for all the info - I'm glad you have wonderful times to look back on and I'll think of a way to amend the text. Perhaps I'll remove Dana White and just refer to President Trump's staging history. I think its reasonable, given the Trump history, that people ask questions about possible staging, and that I should thus recognise that.
Well, yes I guess you could call it "staging history" but I don't see any legitimate questions about "was this staged?" anymore than implying or at least wondering if the Reagan assasination attempt was staged because Reagan used to be an actor. I think it is reprehensible that there are those on the left that seriously think this was somehow staged by the Trump campaign when there was loss of life, serious woundings, incredible blunders by the SS and a still alive ex-president only because of a 1/4 inch movement of his head at the last second.
I think it's an act of Providence that Trump is alive, despite the SS. This substack closes one question - that of the secret service counter-sniper on the roof near Trump being the source of the bullet noises.
Re "was it staged?":
Firstly, someone had put data and narrative together in a video that is convincing a great of people - the vision itself can raise the legitimate question.
Secondly, from here in Australia, despite the intervening decades, pre-internet, totally msm, I DID continue to harbour a question into whether the Reagan event was staged. I don't know what put it into my mind. Thus it would always be a legitimate question for me.
Thirdly - Hollywood/deep state America has an extreme competence in narrative invention/deception/staging. If you're not into The Moon and The 911 events, maybe watch the movie "Wag the Dog". The question "is this genuine?" is always legitimate when one is not actually on the spot.
Everyone knows the possibilities and we have to prosecute the data as we can.
Re "reprehensible":
If people died in the staging of a fake bullet wound that would indeed be reprehensible.
But I haven't prosecuted that question.
Firstly, the staging of a (fake) bullet wound doesn't necessarily imply the deathly consequences in the crowd. I've watched a lot of vision, a huuge amount of vision, and have seen no blood on any person besides Trump. This is good, respectful, but with the amount of recording, watching victims being carried out, I have not seen any blood on any of them. I'm not denying them - I've made some effort to verify - but deaths can be faked. Indeed the death of the strong, good looking fireman protecting his family is an American meme in itself, and the ER first responder in the crowd, telling his story of being helped through his shock by a Veteran is also a common meme. Why do scraggy people not die selfishly running away :)
Secondly, the performance contract relating to a staging of a (fake) bullet wound didn't necessarily include the subsequent consequences, but would obviously be an unwise undertaking.
Thirdly, some people have expressed concern that Trump himself is caught up in the same deep state operations - "2 wings of one bird". For those people, the deep state, military, corporate, and Presidential America kill people all the time. If these forces even cared they could rationalise a sacrificial death with no trouble at all "for the greater cause and strength of America and its corporations and even my career and standing".
This guy did a forensic analysis of the audio of the gunshots. He is a expert with weapons. There were 7 gunshots that he analyzed. Number 8 he thinks is the one that took out Crooks. He believes that there were 3 or 4 shooters from his analysis. I agree with him with my military background. That is why many in the USA think Crooks was a patsy. The FBI immediately said he was working alone. Isn't possible with this many shooters.
Austin Private Wealth, LLC made a short bet against DJT and Rumble the day before the rally. George Soros, Blackrock are big holders in this company. If the assassination would have been successful, they would have made a fortune. Mike Adams shares that proof in this video.
Definitely the first 3 shots, then the next 5, then the very different shot 9. [He didn't address shot 10, 10 secs later, assuming it was the suppressed shot from one of the SS snipers.]
He's saying the first 3 sound different to the 5. I thought that, but with zero experience with guns thought it might be something about the gun associated with the faster shooting mode. Martenson wondered if the shooter got up a little higher from the tin roof, changing the sound. He also brought evidence suggesting the speed and precision (assuming the injuries in the crowd came from the next 5 shots) was way beyond the kid's apparent abilities. The most amazing thing though (to me) is that he presents a tiny bit of vision of the kid and the 1st shot - there is no recoil of any kind in his body - it's all still (assuming no-one has altered the raw footage).
[Personally I think shot 1 (the one that nipped Trump imo] sounds a little different to shots 2&3, but that might be because the iphones are being swivelled around in a hurry, with the direction changing.]
I'm wondering if Crooks was a decoy to keep the Snipers in the 2nd story building occupied while something else was going on. ? Water tower?
That's interesting, but in my mind it is spending a lot of time on a lot of different devices and noise. If he would actually do a full forensic analysis of the audio of each video it would be more valuable. Mike Adams just did Fox News audio analysis and showed by distance there were for sure 3 shooters. There could have been a 4th with 1-5 shots being same distance. That is where video evidence could come in or maybe rounds or weapon sounds would be beneficial to figure out if there was a 4th. The FBI already scrubbed the building that Crooks was on. I don't think we will get that evidence about his weapon. The local police weren't wearing body cams, so that evidence is lacking. I haven't saw any evidence of rounds hitting except where the crowd was. We have Crooks and the sniper round that took him out. Citizen journalists have already disproved he was working alone though. I sent the Mike Adams analysis to my congressmen and several reputable news organizations. We might not find out the truth, but we won't accept the narrative that was presented either.
Highly likely Crooks was a patsy of some kind, and I'm not denying any set up to get Trump. I'm only negating the narrative that those first three bullets were shots in the air from the closest counter-sniper, with Trump faking the injury.
Re "Number 8": The counting of the shots is a bit different, depending on the recording video. In the compilation video I linked, beginning 1:02, there was a slightly different sound between 1,2,3 & 4,5,6,7,8, but both come from outside the perimeter, close to the person recording. Shot 9 was the one that sounded a bit different to me, ending the 4-8 spree. Perhaps he was shot by a different gun at that point or his gun jammed?
1-3 were individual shots and 4-8 sounded automatic, and perhaps that is the difference in the sound. I don't know guns - could Crooks have switched from single shot to automatic? Ten seconds later there was another shot with a different sound again.
Re Austin Private Wealth, on their website the company has said they made a reporting error to the SEC - out by 4 "0's" (1,200 rather than 12,000,000) - it happened with everything they reported that day - clerk error. https://austinprivatewealth.com/
The 1,200 (rather than 12,000,000) put shares were thought to be related to the expectation of another legal case submitted against Trump on the next day.
I don't know anything about guns either, but here are my thoughts.
Assuming that there WAS a bullet that whizzed by Trump's head & nicked his ear, it must have been fired by someone actually wanting to kill him: no professional shooter, even the best in the world, could have guaranteed that a bullet that close would not kill him. It was only because Trump turned his head at the crucial moment that he survived.
So that leaves the fake blood theory as the only alternative possibility...
We know that anything at all can be faked these days - though successfully faking an assassination attempt at a live rally would take a miracle in itself.
And there were actual people killed, presumably by actual bullets (again, it is possible that this could have been faked... heck, the whole thing could have been staged by actors!... but we are entering the realms of the implausible here, IMO).
So if it was the "White Hats" who are responsible, they have to be just as psychopathic as the Black Hats (or Deep State).
So my Scientific Self will point to Occam's Razor - the principle that the simplest hypothesis which explains all the facts is most probably the correct one.
...while my Spiritual Self will believe to my dying day that this was a true miracle, a sign of Grace, a sign that Trump has been chosen by God.
And then there is the principle "By their fruits shall ye know them..."
While Trump is still Trump, with all his faults and failings, he is now talking about unity and coming together. There is a light around him, and the Republican Party itself seems to have united around Trump.
And Trump has reached out to RFK Jr, and he has chosen a VP who is anti-vaccine-mandate (though reportedly pro-vaccine himself).
While it would be nice to have a world leader who was able to call out Big Pharma and their various cons, we know it is not going to happen that way (not if that leader is going to stay alive and in power). So for myself, I'm prepared to take what I can get. I still can't quite forgive Trump for Operation Warp Speed, or for his empowering Fauci & co (which has to be poor judgement, at best, IMO, since I don't believe in 5D chess games).
It doesn't matter one iota what I think of Trump, since I don't get to vote in the US election.
And it remains to be seen how all this will play out in practice.
But for now, I am taking hope where I can find it!
Consider David Sorensen's line of thought about Trump "pushing" the vaccines, quite persuasive.
https://stopworldcontrol.com/warp/
That's a very interesting different take. I assumed he was forced to, or had to do so. But... thinking really hard as a devil's advocate... could a 2 year lockdown plan be realistically managed - not sure about that. But if Trump can produce a rationale for what he did, maintaining his prior view on vaccines (not positive - I think he saw Baron change), that's a good thing into the future. Trump did say he wouldn't have mandated. And brainwashed people were Desperate for a liquid gold vaccine - he had a lot of political pressure among the people (and small business) to get a vaccine out to draw an end to the whole event.
Great comment!
Re "successfully faking an assassination attempt at a live rally would take a miracle in itself"
I'd hope so, but I watched a video account of a guy who said he'd been at the Trump rally, in the bleachers, two rows in front of, and eight seats along from, the guy who died. He had no idea what was happening. He had an impression of something rushing past (in hindsight suggesting a bullet), saw people go down, he didn't know why, but he followed. He was too busy clearing away all of the water bottles so he could crouch low, and didn't see anything of Trump when he first looked up - security were surrounding him. Witness accounts all vary. I think they could get away with quite a lot, particularly with trauma-altered memory.
(Edited)
Dana White, not Dana Smith. Have no idea who Dana Smith is. Dana White is not involved in "staged" professional wrestling.
Thanks so much for the correction on the name. I'm known as the worst proof reader in the world - don't know what went wrong there. You must be the first fight fan who's read it. But on the wrestling, I recently saw a backgrounder on Dana White & Trump, and I thought Trump talked about a wrestler who picked up a guy over his head and threw him two rows back into the audience. I recall Trump laughing that it might be staged, 'but the guy's strong'. When I looked into Dana White's ambit he does run wrestling shows I assumed it was the same thing. Can you clarify? Maybe I'm remembering it wrongly?
To be more accurate, Dana White does not run "wrestling shows". He is CEO of a company that oversees mixed martial arts competitions which is quite different then the staged entertainment wrestling shows that you are thinking of. President Trump had some tongue-in-cheek fun years ago by participating in some of those shows where he had an ongoing "feud" with Vince McMahon, president of WWE. That is how he came to know Hulk Hogan and Andre the Giant that Hulk referred to in his speech at RNC. Hulk and Andre were not involved with Dana White's martial arts business. It is totally separate. Dana White and President Trump have been friends since his Trump Taj Mahal days when he sponsored Dana Whites mixed martial arts bouts. Ahh, those were the days!
Thank you so much for all the info - I'm glad you have wonderful times to look back on and I'll think of a way to amend the text. Perhaps I'll remove Dana White and just refer to President Trump's staging history. I think its reasonable, given the Trump history, that people ask questions about possible staging, and that I should thus recognise that.
Thanks again.
Well, yes I guess you could call it "staging history" but I don't see any legitimate questions about "was this staged?" anymore than implying or at least wondering if the Reagan assasination attempt was staged because Reagan used to be an actor. I think it is reprehensible that there are those on the left that seriously think this was somehow staged by the Trump campaign when there was loss of life, serious woundings, incredible blunders by the SS and a still alive ex-president only because of a 1/4 inch movement of his head at the last second.
I think it's an act of Providence that Trump is alive, despite the SS. This substack closes one question - that of the secret service counter-sniper on the roof near Trump being the source of the bullet noises.
Re "was it staged?":
Firstly, someone had put data and narrative together in a video that is convincing a great of people - the vision itself can raise the legitimate question.
Secondly, from here in Australia, despite the intervening decades, pre-internet, totally msm, I DID continue to harbour a question into whether the Reagan event was staged. I don't know what put it into my mind. Thus it would always be a legitimate question for me.
Thirdly - Hollywood/deep state America has an extreme competence in narrative invention/deception/staging. If you're not into The Moon and The 911 events, maybe watch the movie "Wag the Dog". The question "is this genuine?" is always legitimate when one is not actually on the spot.
Everyone knows the possibilities and we have to prosecute the data as we can.
Re "reprehensible":
If people died in the staging of a fake bullet wound that would indeed be reprehensible.
But I haven't prosecuted that question.
Firstly, the staging of a (fake) bullet wound doesn't necessarily imply the deathly consequences in the crowd. I've watched a lot of vision, a huuge amount of vision, and have seen no blood on any person besides Trump. This is good, respectful, but with the amount of recording, watching victims being carried out, I have not seen any blood on any of them. I'm not denying them - I've made some effort to verify - but deaths can be faked. Indeed the death of the strong, good looking fireman protecting his family is an American meme in itself, and the ER first responder in the crowd, telling his story of being helped through his shock by a Veteran is also a common meme. Why do scraggy people not die selfishly running away :)
Secondly, the performance contract relating to a staging of a (fake) bullet wound didn't necessarily include the subsequent consequences, but would obviously be an unwise undertaking.
Thirdly, some people have expressed concern that Trump himself is caught up in the same deep state operations - "2 wings of one bird". For those people, the deep state, military, corporate, and Presidential America kill people all the time. If these forces even cared they could rationalise a sacrificial death with no trouble at all "for the greater cause and strength of America and its corporations and even my career and standing".
This guy did a forensic analysis of the audio of the gunshots. He is a expert with weapons. There were 7 gunshots that he analyzed. Number 8 he thinks is the one that took out Crooks. He believes that there were 3 or 4 shooters from his analysis. I agree with him with my military background. That is why many in the USA think Crooks was a patsy. The FBI immediately said he was working alone. Isn't possible with this many shooters.
https://www.brighteon.com/96421c5f-2175-4737-aee3-b8dbac111b66
Austin Private Wealth, LLC made a short bet against DJT and Rumble the day before the rally. George Soros, Blackrock are big holders in this company. If the assassination would have been successful, they would have made a fortune. Mike Adams shares that proof in this video.
https://www.brighteon.com/4d95adf8-ee99-44ce-9744-fb3507a3fd2d
I just looked at the Dr Chris Martenson video lining up different audios here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03AxTE7R5Cg&t=5s
Definitely the first 3 shots, then the next 5, then the very different shot 9. [He didn't address shot 10, 10 secs later, assuming it was the suppressed shot from one of the SS snipers.]
He's saying the first 3 sound different to the 5. I thought that, but with zero experience with guns thought it might be something about the gun associated with the faster shooting mode. Martenson wondered if the shooter got up a little higher from the tin roof, changing the sound. He also brought evidence suggesting the speed and precision (assuming the injuries in the crowd came from the next 5 shots) was way beyond the kid's apparent abilities. The most amazing thing though (to me) is that he presents a tiny bit of vision of the kid and the 1st shot - there is no recoil of any kind in his body - it's all still (assuming no-one has altered the raw footage).
[Personally I think shot 1 (the one that nipped Trump imo] sounds a little different to shots 2&3, but that might be because the iphones are being swivelled around in a hurry, with the direction changing.]
I'm wondering if Crooks was a decoy to keep the Snipers in the 2nd story building occupied while something else was going on. ? Water tower?
That's interesting, but in my mind it is spending a lot of time on a lot of different devices and noise. If he would actually do a full forensic analysis of the audio of each video it would be more valuable. Mike Adams just did Fox News audio analysis and showed by distance there were for sure 3 shooters. There could have been a 4th with 1-5 shots being same distance. That is where video evidence could come in or maybe rounds or weapon sounds would be beneficial to figure out if there was a 4th. The FBI already scrubbed the building that Crooks was on. I don't think we will get that evidence about his weapon. The local police weren't wearing body cams, so that evidence is lacking. I haven't saw any evidence of rounds hitting except where the crowd was. We have Crooks and the sniper round that took him out. Citizen journalists have already disproved he was working alone though. I sent the Mike Adams analysis to my congressmen and several reputable news organizations. We might not find out the truth, but we won't accept the narrative that was presented either.
I'll have a look at the video soon.
Highly likely Crooks was a patsy of some kind, and I'm not denying any set up to get Trump. I'm only negating the narrative that those first three bullets were shots in the air from the closest counter-sniper, with Trump faking the injury.
Re "Number 8": The counting of the shots is a bit different, depending on the recording video. In the compilation video I linked, beginning 1:02, there was a slightly different sound between 1,2,3 & 4,5,6,7,8, but both come from outside the perimeter, close to the person recording. Shot 9 was the one that sounded a bit different to me, ending the 4-8 spree. Perhaps he was shot by a different gun at that point or his gun jammed?
1-3 were individual shots and 4-8 sounded automatic, and perhaps that is the difference in the sound. I don't know guns - could Crooks have switched from single shot to automatic? Ten seconds later there was another shot with a different sound again.
Re Austin Private Wealth, on their website the company has said they made a reporting error to the SEC - out by 4 "0's" (1,200 rather than 12,000,000) - it happened with everything they reported that day - clerk error. https://austinprivatewealth.com/
The 1,200 (rather than 12,000,000) put shares were thought to be related to the expectation of another legal case submitted against Trump on the next day.