roger’s hallucination even involves 3 windows from which shots were allegedly fired in quick synchronized succession, he…
If PeakProsperity ever paid him any amount, he should have to pay them back in full, including interest and damages for their reputational damage!
sorry leadcounsel,
I have everything in a perfectly accurate 3D CAD model. Math does not lie. I can show you any angle and any possible collision if you are doubting anything else. I could show you that the left bleachers are clear.
And we don’t even have to dispute my CAD module. Just give me a plausible explanation why these notches in the fence are at that specific position? I only have one: The shooter from window 2 had to cut it out to be able to take the shot!
your allegedly perfectly accurate 3D CAD model has never (i.e., NEVER) been cross-checked with reality…
it is perfectly accurate in your hallucinating fantasy, but/and does not match any real setting whatsoever.
Looking through a scope to 150 yards, I don’t believe one can see a close fence, e g. it becomes “invisible” and I don’t think “notches” help.
As for damage to a chain fence, very common. That fence is obviously very old and neglected. It could be 30 years old, the current top may have once been the bottom. Damaged from any number of events such as being cut to remove a nuisance tree sapling. I have several sections in my fence where nuisance small trees grew into the fence including a section prior owners cut a big notch out to remove it … Not uncommon.
I cannot envision a scenario where the assassin run out in plain view to cut a section of fencing… It’s preposterous.
But it can be manipulated, like your animated photos are obviously manipulative.
Look, again, a photo from the actual shooting victim proves that these windows are obscured behind the bleachers and crowd. There’s no trajectory for him, or Trump, from the windows.
One other thing to keep in mind is just the velocity variation between rounds of the same type. Like from that video about AR15 barrel length. For 16-inch in that video, the variation for 5 shots was 83 fps (2875-2958 fps). Just using a rough calculation, the range for the Trump mic time differences is around 130 fps. So the time differences are most likely a combination of trajectory distance from recorder AND natural variation of speed from bullet to bullet.
There’s also a phenomenon where successive bullets will lose velocity as the barrel heats up, which may account for a lot of the decrease in time differences between the first 3 shots.
How do you know the shooter did the so-called fence cutting? Could have been squirrells with metal teeth. 
As possible as your theories to date
I don’t think you’re really thinking about this issue. Suppose you got the opportunity to see the assassination attempt video once. What are the odds you would answer correctly about how many shots Crooks had fired and how many shots had been fired in total?
I dunno … the phone seems to be just a few inches from the ground at that point. If the angle of the phone changes the view could change pretty quickly. We’ve seen the view change pretty quickly on both Dave’s and “boosted cop’s” video’s when the shots start flying.
That said, I can’t get over how weird the “broken window” appearance is. And the “reflections” answer doesn’t do anything for me. In at least one of the screenshots referenced in Roger’s posts the phone is just a few inches from the ground. What would be reflecting? It would have to be something at LEAST ten feet off the ground even if it’s just beyond the fence - like a big mylar balloon. There’s never been anything like that shown on other videos.
Can you post the exact picture so we can evaluate? From my memory, the low angle images have the rope reflection (window imperfections on both W2 and W3), and are either dark or W3 reflects the red barn. White reflections could be clouds, or someone suggested the white barn rooftops… Dark reflections could be either trees, or no reflection from that angle.
Bottom line: If you take pictures of an object from say 30 angles, then put them back-to-back in an animated gif, the object will most certainly appear to move. It’s the equivalent of an old-school cartoon book, quickly flipping thru pages. The static images appear to “move” but it’s just an illusion.
See this link for a simple example. This is effectively what @roger-knight has done with his animated gifs. https://youtu.be/J2xrN5WQuxw
That was an incorrect early story. The FBI has already stated it was an assassination attempt. Full stop. And the FBI is no friend of Mr. Trump.
Do you remember in the first assassination attempt almost all the mainstream media reported the shots as “popping noises”? CNN outdid itself, though, it said that Trump “fell”, which wasn’t even nominally true. CNN had that headline up for TWO HOURS despite having cameras there in person and showing the picture of Trump with his face bloody and fist raised along with that ridiculous headline.
So, what do you think actually happened?
By the way, I don’t think putting people on ignore is childish. It’s a way of avoiding dealing with trolls. Once I’ve determined that people are not interested in the truth (in this forum generally because they hate Trump), I put them on ignore.
The Trolls have been crawling out of the woodwork.
That’s one screenshot that looks like it’s from just 3 or 4 inches off the ground. I’m not saying I agree with with plexiglass foil theory, I just don’t know.
Case closed. My bad.
Notice the angle, this is ground level, to the SW of Window 3. The red barns and white roofs or white clouds are being reflected.
This is common on all the low angled images.
Window 2 has many similar reflections. There’s no “plexiglass foil,” or other nonsense.
Now this was taken standing up, from the SE of these windows. Totally different angles.
In a different thread I posted every window screenshot over this relevant time and there’s only a 5 second gap where Window 3 is off-camera, and simply no possible way any person, even with a helper, could accomplish what is being alleged - a window removed, 3 shots fired, and window replaced in the exact 5 seconds coordinated that it’s off camera. And also not be seen by the cop standing right there looking at it, or the dozen people at the fence line looking at it. Simply impossible.
About 5 seconds before shooting starts, cop is standing right there looking in the direction of the window. No chance he’s going to not see someone removing a window.
There were about a dozen or more people standing at this position as shooting began. In fact the cop was yelling at them to move so all of their attention was focused towards the cop and the building. Zero chance these people would fail to observe someone taking down a window, and a big open window, with someone firing out of it. Someone would have seen that with a dozen or more sets of observing eyeballs…
I’m not saying someone is removing the window - I TOLD YOU THAT. I don’t know what it means - I TOLD YOU THAT. What I said was - I don’t know how that could be a reflection. The camera is at ground level, so a the part of window that is 5 feet up and mounted vertically would be reflecting something 10 feet up if it’s reflecting something from the same distance.
If it’s reflecting something from a greater distance, it would be reflecting something even higher up!
We all know there is nothing even remotely like the effects of window 3 in any of the other windows.
To give a comparison to another conspiracy: I know Oswald didn’t fire the shot that killed Kennedy. Who killed him? I DON’T KNOW!
To give an example from an older controversy: Mark Twain was a famous doubter that William Shaksper of Avon wrote the works attributed to “William Shakespeare”. He wrote a very well thought out short book on the subject. The 17th Earl of Oxford, the current top candidate, had not yet been identified at the time of Twain’s death. Sir Francis Bacon was probably the leading candidate as of the date that Twain wrote his book. Twain made the conclusion that he didn’t know who wrote “Shakespeare”, but he was sure it wasn’t Shaksper. As for Bacon, if I remember right, he said time would tell. Sometimes all you can do is say that the pieces don’t fit right.
the sun would qualify as something from a greater distance…
as I have said many times before, it is very important to go for the highest resolution possible/available…
roger uses the most shaking and lowest resolution he can find to cobble together his fake animations and waste our time…
already on august 15th I posted the high resolution bodycam images that I reposted above, but he keeps his fantasy hallucinations alive by treating us like fools with his fraudulent animations…
this leads me to only one conclusion: he has no good intentions, probably even malicious intentions, and certainly no willingness to help discover what really happened…
Hi Sonja,
I think you are referring to these two pictures, namely T-6:83 and T-6:80.
To me it looks like a very clean cut, because if the camera would have to move so much in 30 milliseconds, it would go out of focus for at least a couple of milliseconds needing time to focus again. It also looks zoomed out? How does that happen in 30 milliseconds?
Since I am not a video specialist and this is just my personal opinion, maybe a specialist can come and give his professional opinion on this one, or else we simply disagree, which also fine. 
Excellent points! I can clearly see the red barn, white roof. I really don’t understand people’s inability to understand that windows reflect differently from different angles.
These three shells found to the left of his body, perhaps near where Michel had been positioned while administering whatever first aid she chose to administer? Michel appeared to be the closest responder on that side of the shooter. Her standing there could have obscured the original count, or she may have been in the perfect position to plant those extra casings.
Edit: If we then focus on Michel’s body language and actions, she comes up on the roof, IFAK looking items are strewn about, she acquires gloves, yet seems to perform some manner of at least checking immediate vitals without them, then finishing putting them on to then stand around nervously. 18:33:45 area of Beaver bodycam 2 shows her fishing around in her pockets for something, also a noticeable audible ‘thunk’ of something. Eventually asking about going back down, stating she has “other stuff” to idk I can’t make out what she mumbles. Also in the same area of footage, “I thought he wasn’t coming?”, curious as to who that’s a reference to.
