Failed Trump Assassination Attempt

[Joe]

I've noticed a couple changes since the assassination attempt, which may or may not be relevant. First, Trump seems a bit more subdued and serene. He made a point of focusing on unity, being president for "all Americans."

You should check his speech last night in Michigan. In essence, he:

railed against the “radical Left Democrats”, accused his opponents of “rigging” the election and calling Mr Biden “crooked”.

goaded Nancy Pelosi over reports that she has advised Mr Biden to quit the election race, accusing her of turning on the president “like a dog”.

resumed his claims that South and Central American countries are sending their criminals to the US.

“They’re dumping their criminals in the United States, and we’re not gonna take it anymore,” Trump said, prompting a standing ovation from the crowd as he promised to deliver the “largest deportation operation” in history.

“When I return to the White House, we will stop the plunder, rape, slaughter and destruction of our American suburbs and cities.”

So not much change there, at least in his speech, which may not necessarily translate to action. We'll see.

 

[Niall]

This photo of Crooks is - apart from the profile photo of him that's presumably from when he was in high school - the only one of him that has been put out there. And the caption accompanying it throughout media reports is: "The photo of Thomas Matthew Crooks taken by a Beaver County Emergency Services Unit officer."

How did Beaver County (which is adjacent to Butler County in Pennsylvania) police obtain this? If they in fact actually took the photo, as the caption claims, then at what point when were they this close to Crooks?

Is it a still from drone footage? If so, presumably it's Crooks' own drone footage from just prior to the event, because the official word is that only he flew one up before or during the event, and also because that grey t-shirt looks like a match with what he was wearing that day.

 

[Gawan]

I think he needs to repeat the same analysis for several more of the videos and compare them all. I put a couple into Audacity (including the RSBN) to see what I could find, but like you, it's not my area. I do have a few questions that I hope some forensics experts will talk about:

1) what would shots coming from inside the building sound like compared to ones coming from outside (including the counter-sniper)?

2) for closely spaced shots, what are the effects on certain microphones registering bullets/reports/echoes? How easily disentangled are they?

3) what variations, if any, are there in the reports that follow the sound of the passing bullets? What conditions affect any slight differences in sound signatures? E.g., are there small variations bullet to bullet? Are all shots nearly identical? Etc.

It is sometimes difficult to tell from where a shot is coming from, factors like wind, trees, hills, echoes can create wrong impressions. At least in my experience. What could be doable - only in theory - to at least identify the sound pattern if it is the same calibre. Though also here, are many other noises in the background, and it doesn't mean that all used the same weapon and calibre. But, I suspect, that at least Crooks and most likely the other sniper used the same calibre and weapon type.

Anyway, the videos released all do sound like weapons with a silencer and as far as I can tell. But I can be wrong, of course.

Here is an example of a normal unsilenced weapon and one with a silencer:

 

[Artisan Well]

Yep, all of that speaks to someone wanting chaos. But that then brings up the question of what went wrong? Why did he survive?

Since we all into "the divine" here, what's our take on the, now popular, idea that it was "divine intervention"?

Seems to me there are four general options there:

1) Just luck (see number 3)
2) Divine intervention
3)Trump's "higher self" stepping in because "it wasn't his time".

Number 2 has 2 sub options: STS or STO? STO I think would not have involved themselves. Free will and all that. So that leaves STS. Why would they have wanted to prevent the "hot heads" in the CIA etc. from killing Trump?

In the last few sessions there was a reference to the Quorum meeting and a "program change" upcoming, with previous similar program changes being cited as the assassination of JFK and 911.

If Trump had been killed, would that have qualified as a "program change"?

In the last session they said that the quorum was meeting to effect changes to control people more, but that control would lead to more resistance, and that was needed because more balance is needed. Question is: are the quorum people aware that they will achieve more resistance and therefore balance by their actions? Are they intending that? Are SOME of them intending that?

In a previous session (20 years ago or so!) the quorum were referred to as 'watchers' and that they were "keeping track of prophecies".

These days, there's a growing sense of "biblical end times" prophecies, and the 'divine salvation of Trump' certainly adds grist to that mill.

And now we have a UFO(s) spotted over the assassination attempt. Watching? Facilitating? Or preventing?

I am just learning the technical functions of this forum and wanted to quote only as follows:

"Number 2 has 2 sub options: STS or STO? STO I think would not have involved themselves. Free will and all that. So that leaves STS. Why would they have wanted to prevent the "hot heads" in the CIA etc. from killing Trump?"

Wouldn't STO intervention (which appears to be limited only to the inspiration to use the chart and turn his head) be possible if President Trump's intent was clearly not to be assassinated? The actions/intent, the free will, of the shooter and those who may be behind him/handlers and those in the security role who may have cooperated were not interfered with. For these reasons, I don't believe we can eliminate STO from #2. Incidentally, the feeling that it was divine and the attribution to God by so many is notable + the prayers of so many for his safety would generate a lot of energy and intent for his survival. Just a week before the event, Amanda Grace (Christian Prophet) held a streamed prayer vigil for President Trump and every guest prayed for his safety.

LIVE: Night of Prayer for the Nation and the Trump Family

Stand with Amanda Grace and special guests as we unite in prayer, interceding for our nation and the leaders. Engage in this simple yet powerful act to seek the well-being and future of our country. Y

rumble.com

 

[Goemon_]

How did Beaver County (which is adjacent to Butler County in Pennsylvania) police obtain this? If they in fact actually took the photo, as the caption claims, then at what point when were they this close to Crooks?

This guy as a theory for where the picture was taken:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1814487590332256489

 

[Artisan Well]

I agree.
Kinda makes sense given the lyrics:

I don't think the fact that he used the aria previously detracts in any way from the use of it here. That seems like an assumption that because he used the aria in other situations, that the deliberate choice to use it here is meaningless.

 

[Artisan Well]

I am just learning the technical functions of this forum and wanted to quote only as follows:

"Number 2 has 2 sub options: STS or STO? STO I think would not have involved themselves. Free will and all that. So that leaves STS. Why would they have wanted to prevent the "hot heads" in the CIA etc. from killing Trump?"

Wouldn't STO intervention (which appears to be limited only to the inspiration to use the chart and turn his head) be possible if President Trump's intent was clearly not to be assassinated? The actions/intent, the free will, of the shooter and those who may be behind him/handlers and those in the security role who may have cooperated were not interfered with. For these reasons, I don't believe we can eliminate STO from #2. Incidentally, the feeling that it was divine and the attribution to God by so many is notable + the prayers of so many for his safety would generate a lot of energy and intent for his survival. Just a week before the event, Amanda Grace (Christian Prophet) held a streamed prayer vigil for President Trump and every guest prayed for his safety.

LIVE: Night of Prayer for the Nation and the Trump Family

Stand with Amanda Grace and special guests as we unite in prayer, interceding for our nation and the leaders. Engage in this simple yet powerful act to seek the well-being and future of our country. Y

rumble.com

I will add this C's clip as support for my argument above that the prayer and intent of so many created positive energy to support STO intervention:

Q: (L) What prevented this from happening?

A: Divine intervention. [energy surge]

 

[Artisan Well]

I'm for the divine intervention. I'm not sure STO force cannot intervene in an indirect way. I can't find back Trump declaration, but if I remember well, he said he turned his head due to a placard. So perhaps STO forces gave a nudge to the person with the placard. Trump choice was to ignore it or not.

About the Quorum, I'm not sure it is an entity acting as a single man. Perhaps it's the assembly of different forces which try to push their own interests. So perhaps a decision is made (the assassination) and counter forces manage to make it fail. Or the decision was to go with Trump and some forces tried to carry on with the assassination regardless and there will be some spanking? Hard to know.

Would be interesting too, to know which densities are involved in the Quorum.

As for the UFO, I vote for "watching".

It was a chart about illegal immigration statistics & President Trump went off script/tele-prompter (as he often does) and asked for the chart to be put up. This was an intuitive act.

 

[happyliza]

BTW it doesn't necessarily have to be and extraterrestrial UFO. USA and others have their own UFO's - terrestrial.
However, if it is off planet then, should the assassination have been successful then we are missing the comet lol. As per Caesar's assassination.
I guess, hopefully, other than the actual perpetrators, we will finally get to know the actual events if the C's share this with us. Few others will get it, unless we share it and it then becomes the final piece of the jigsaw to everyone.
After all, it is not as if everyone here has not been doing all the research they possibly can in connecting the dots homework!
Thank you everyone for all the sleuthing.

 

[Niall]

Well then, that currently leaves us with just the official lone gunman theory. Crooks may have been 'helped' onto the rooftop by the SS temporarily 'going blind', but other than that, the titantic decade-long struggle of US, and thus global, politics came down to the accuracy and shooting skills of a 20-year-old with a scope-less "AR-style" gun.

On second thought, that audio analysis is weak. It's just 'expert said so':

The audio analysis of the gunshots conducted by The Times and Robert C. Maher, a gunfire acoustics expert at Montana State University in Bozeman, indicates that two bursts of shots were fired. Both the first round of three and the second of five shots were fired approximately 330 to 390 feet from the C-SPAN microphone Mr. Trump was speaking into. That location was consistent with the location of the suspect’s body. There was no significant difference between the sound of the eight shots, which suggests that they likely came from the same firearm, Mr. Maher said.

Where is his analysis?

I give more credence to the Peak Prosperity guy's analysis because he showed his analysis and put it out there on social media, whereas the Montana professor's conclusions are just being cited by the MSM.

 

[Joe]

Using this image previously posted by @Approaching Infinity, and amended by me, it seems to me that the shooter that took the shot(s) at Trump was in one of the windows shown by the white lines.

This would be almost directly under Crooks' position. The first three shots were likely from this shooter. The first missed Trump, so did the other two. Any of these three could have hit Kopenhaver and Dutch in the bleacher. Two seconds later Crooks fired off 5 wild shots, one of them hitting Compatore as he reacted to the first three shots.

One second later Crooks was taken out by the sniper team (the sixth shot), who were alerted to the fire location right below Crooks (as seen in the video) but immediately eyeballed Crooks, who had also by that time fired off his shots.

We're talking about 2-3 seconds between the last of the first three shots and the 5 shot sequence, and then one second between that five shot sequence and the shot that killed Crooks. A later shot may have been an extra shot to ensure he was dead or fired by the reported local gunman or police officer.


In this video below you can just about still see Crooks as the first of the first 3 shots are fired. He seems completely motionless, no recoil, as mentioned by @Cosmos previously. This lends credence to the idea that he did not shoot first.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1812347129265836172

In this video, it seems clear that the first three shots are muffled, i.e. coming from inside and in the front of the building from this vantage point. While the 2nd burst of 5 are much clearer and out in the open, i.e. from Crooks.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1812567997535371581

 

[Goemon_]

I think he needs to repeat the same analysis for several more of the videos and compare them all. I put a couple into Audacity (including the RSBN) to see what I could find, but like you, it's not my area. I do have a few questions that I hope some forensics experts will talk about:

Mike Adams did an analysis from the RSBN video:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1814714637528465819

 

[Niall]

This guy as a theory for where the picture was taken:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1814487590332256489

Good find. I was looking around for some low concrete wall, and that looks like a good match. So Crooks' "handlers" presumably took that photo from a window above him prior to the patsy getting into position on the roof.

 

[Cosmos]

At this point, I don't think we can gather much useful data from the actual sounds recorded of the shots themselves. Too many variables to make any conclusive statements. I wouldn't rely on that piece of evidence. BUT the shots we heard certainly can give us a clue in terms of their timing sequence: the first three shots shot came in a slower even succession followed by a pause and then a more rapid/uncontrolled shooting after the pause.

 

[Niall]

Mike Adams did an analysis from the RSBN video:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1814714637528465819

After years of him getting things wrong, I don't trust Mike Adams' self-declared credentials as an "acoustics expert."

His breakdown of the second volley of shots assumes that his reading of what is the 'snap' of the shot being fired, and what is the bullet's 'report', are accurately identified. What Adams is positing is a scenario where there's a second shooter at about twice the distance from Crooks, and a third shooter at about two times the distance. Any 'plan' involving multiple shooters becomes incredibly complex to execute if you have them trying to fire simultaneously - along the same trajectory - from various distances.

Occam's razor: a second shooter is along the same line of fire, and at the same distance, but inside the building on which Crooks is positioned, ideally shooting through a window directly below Crooks (in order that their bullets follow the same trajectory as Crooks' follow-up volley). Such a plan would plausibly 'mask' a pro shooter's involvement. Anything more complex would be uncovered by ballistics analysis.

I think Crooks hears the first three shots fired from below him, then fires his 5/6 rounds from the rooftop, then he's terminated, and the 'pro team' leaves by a backdoor.