Audio Analysis Is Most Consistent Two Shooters At Trump Rally

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@bigtim

It is correct to dismiss the cruiser dashcam for anything more than the number of shots, because cars are heavily insulated and muffle sound. Anyone can watch police dashcam videos of shootings and the guns will all sound the same due to this insulation.

this is an excellent point!

every anomaly and every remarkable observation in each of the audio recordings that is analysed must be given the necessary care and attention because these anomalies are the ones that support or undermine one or the other hypothesis!

in the sound analysis that Mike Bell discussed on his youtube channel he pointed out that both RealDjStew and the witnesses near the trees heard their first shots TOO EARLY when compared to the other recordings…
I believe that this observation supports my hypothesis that the first 3 shots were fired from the highest roof at the AGR parking…

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@rough_country_gypsy

The only ones who didn’t see him were Law Enforcement

I go for the higher roof because of the simple principle that the simplest suggestion is more likely than the complex ones… the more assumptions are necessary, the lower its likelihood, and the highest roof is the first place many would come up with spontaneously…

my motivation is also fuelled by the effort people take to boycott and ridicule this effort…

I referred to the term misdirection many times, and that is for good reason: there is a snake oil promoting judas goat that stimulates everybody to focus on the vent hypothesis, and this option depends on the highest number of assumptions, and thus has the lowest likelihood of being relevant…

(I just noticed that my reply fits 1 screen let’s call that progress too )

[rough_country_gypsy]

@howdoiknowthisinfo

the highest roof is the first place many would come up with spontaneously…

Not if they wanted to get away with it. I’d be like, “Oh, hell no!” If it has to be this property, I’m inside. If I have to be outside and I can pick the property…it ain’t this one.

[rough_country_gypsy]

This place is like a wormhole…I sit down for a minute and lose hours of my day.

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

tell me about it…
when I joined 2 weeks ago, I thought this was an open minded forum that would welcome my well documented view and consider it seriously…
only that simple observation that there is so much opposition for any other view than that that is pushed towards the vents is an indication that my view is more plausible than people are made to believe…
really remarkable…

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@rough_country_gypsy

If I have to be outside and I can pick the property…it ain’t this one

yes, but you look at it totally differently than myself…

it looks like you assume the attack was made possible because there were a couple of mishaps that happened and that, like with the aligned cheese hole principle of the airline disaster analysis, all the mishaps aligned by coincidence such that the attack was possible.

from my point of view, it was very well orchestrated and everything people assume went wrong was organized like that on purpose:

• the layout of the rally venue is exceptionally suited for a two shooter setup: the one on the lower roof pays the prize for what the one on the higher roof did;
• the misdirection ensured that everybody looked at the lower roof, which made it possible for the real shooter to get off the higher roof unnoticed…
• the secret service officers were not really up to snuff
• there were no eyes in the sky for a reason: if there had been drones or even CCTV, they would have noticed both shooters immediately, and it would not have happened…

[macd]

Do you have a route of how a person could have gotten on to or off of the higher roof?

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

yes, it is very easily accessed from roofs around that one…

have a look at Spa Guy’s drone footage in which he shows the path towards the lowest roof, and as it happens, this path passes by the high roof I have been mentioning since the start…

Updated Drone Analysis: Rooftop Access Butler's Trump Assassination Attempt How Did He Get on Roof?

[macd]

I’m sorry, I’ve watched Spa Guy’s video again and I don’t see an easy access to the high roof from the west or south side (at least a six-foot difference to the next lower roof). But perhaps there are other access points to the high roof.

[sonjax6]

@howdoiknowthisinfo

in several of my posts I have made it very clear that it simply does not make sense to use two pseudorandomly chosen points in 3D space (e.g., Trump’s ear and “the” impact point at the railing to deduce any conclusive analytic outcome,

What? The two known points of impact of the first bullet are pseudorandomly chosen points???

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

he may have had a small ladder and pulled it up the roof, he…
a professional sniper gets where he needs to be…

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

let me know if you need a new defibrillator after recovering from this realization

[rough_country_gypsy]

@howdoiknowthisinfo

it looks like you assume the attack was made possible because there were a couple of mishaps that happened and that, like with the aligned cheese hole principle of the airline disaster analysis, all the mishaps aligned by coincidence such that the attack was possible.

Not at all. I believe it was coordinated. The only problem I’m having is finding legitimate evidence that there was a 2nd shooter. I’m trying to base my opinion solely on the evidence, not my (or anyone else’s) speculative opinion. With everything that’s been exposed on this site thus far, there’s more evidence supporting a single shooter than anything else.

As for the assassins lining up from the tall building - to Crooks - to the podium, I don’t think they care that much. They could stand a guy 10 feet in front of the podium, shoot Trump with a 44 right between the eyes, and they’d still tell us (and confirm) it was a single shooter from the rooftop, and the zombie public would believe it, and no one would be held accountable. At the end of the day, regardless of the conclusions reached here, the outcome has already been reached. Single Shooter, Republican, AR-15, Loner, Bullied, etc etc.

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@rough_country_gypsy

a single shooter from the rooftop

or even a suicide

so far, I have not seen much evidence that it was the man on the lower roof…

and something that has not been mentioned before is the following: since the sound-enabled version webcam officer who shot the webcam footage of the SWAT officer who fired the 9th shot has been made available, the story has changed in the sense that that 9th shot injured the man on the roof and disabled his rifle such that he could not fire any more shots…

according to Gary from Paramount Tactical, with the damage to that rifle, he would still have been able to fire 1 shot at a time, so the gun was not really disabled.

but that is not what I find remarkable…
if that rifle was damaged and injured the man on the roof such that he was dazzled, and damaged, why did nobody in the past 4 weeks mentioned that the rifle that was recovered from the roof suffered hardware damage?

so, I do not really believe that the SWAT officer damaged his rifle.
as the sound evidence shows, there were 3 shots fired in about 2 seconds, 1 second delay, 5 shots in 1 second, 1 second delay, 9th shot, 10 seconds delay, 10th shot.

the 9th shot injured that man on the roof with certainty. that bullet did not kill him because of the large blood trail, and if he had died of the 9th shot, that blood trail would have been much smaller

so, the 10th shot finished him off.
as I mentioned in one of my earlier posts today, I think the 10th shot was fired by that same SWAT officer that took the 9th shot, and the reason why I say this is that the damaged body/head we see is not consistent with the damage that would have been caused by a 300 winchester magnum round, which is the type of rounds that match the sniper rifles used by the snipers 1/2/3/4 on the barns…

and indeed: the fast buriers of information had their explanation already ready before the event happened, he

[bumblebeeez]

I will add this:

If you ARE going to have multiple shooters, you want it to align as much as possible for believability.

So you want the locations they shoot from to be comparable, as far as angles and distances. If you’re planning something like this, you know it will be heavily scrutinized, and if it is going to be blamed on a lone wolf/pasty, then it has to match up enough.

So even if multiple shots arrive in a general area and there isn’t perfect evidence of an exact origin, it needs to make enough common sense that it passes.

And as other have pointed out, if you have set up an elaborate plan for a security hole, you probably want multiple shooters to seal the deal. The assassin(s) wanted Trump dead. Multiple shooters make sense, but it has to be believable.

[bumblebeeez]

If the second shot came from the SWAT guy on the ground, either through his left forehead or mouth and out behind his right ear, it makes sense that his body would have been pumping blood for quite awhile out of the wounds. It does explain the two trails of blood and the pumping probably wouldn’t have stopped until blood failed to reach his brain stem and the pressure was relieved/equalized. It also may have stopped if his heart didn’t get enough blood and then a heart attack may have occurred or if his lungs filled up with blood and there wasn’t enough oxygen, etc…

[rough_country_gypsy]

From the body cam images, it doesn’t appear “to me” that the gun is damaged either. Crooks may have taken one in the hand or forearm, though. There’s a lot of blood on his arm when he’s cuffed.

@cmartenson is going to have to chime in on the outgoing “hot shot” that was picked up on Trump’s microphone. I’m only going by what the sound analysis experts say because that is not in my wheelhouse. Granted, they can’t seem to agree either and I do agree with you that isn’t the type of wound I’d expect to see on Crooks.

What’s the evidence that it’s not Crooks on the roof? It seems cut and dry to me.

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@bumblebeeez

So even if multiple shots arrive in a general area and there isn’t perfect evidence of an exact origin, it needs to make enough common sense that it passes.

exactly right!
and this is why I think it is very interesting that Mike Bell reported it as an “anomaly” that 2 of the registrations came too early (!) in the recordings of RealDjStew and the witnesses near the trees…

every anomaly must be explained logically and not considered an artefact…

and about the alignment: nobody at the rally area can distinguish by eye or ear whether shots were fired form the lower or the higher roof…

only those who were close to the higher roof can make that distinction, and that are the people near the trees and RealDjStew…

until two days ago, I thought there was only one shooter, namely the one I call the real shooter…
since the bodycam footage with the SWAT officer has become available with sound, the odds have shifted a little in favour of the man on the lower roof having fired 5 rounds in quick succession, but as it is very unlikely that these have been shot very precisely, I came to the scenario I explained yesterday:

1. the first 3 shots were fired with a suppressed rifle using supersonic rounds. the suppression muffles the sound so that the next 5 shots (when fired by the man on the lower roof) would make people believe they heard the first 3 shots coming from that same location
2. the next 5 shots were fired by the man on the lower roof, but in a random direction, as he had just been chased down by the police person who peeped over the roof, and as he was being shouted at… remember the misdirection: everybody was looking at this man on the low roof
3. meanwhile, the man on the high roof, shot a couple of additional shots with his suppressed rifle, but instead of firing supersonic rounds that would be heard in the sound recordings, he used subsonic rounds to fire at the bleachers and injure James Copenhaver and the nephew of a congressman and kill Corey Comperatore.

the use of a suppressed rifle with subsonic rounds would be perfectly in line with the reporting of one of the sound analysist who said that there were many suppressed/subsonic rounds flying by Trump’s microphone…

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@rough_country_gypsy

What’s the evidence that it’s not Crooks on the roof? It seems cut and dry to me.

this is the image Chris showed yesterday as a sighting of thomas crooks:

and this is why I avoid calling that man on the roof crooks:

[rough_country_gypsy]

OK. I still don’t get it. Looks like Crooks to me.