But the windows allegedly do not open. And we can see they were not damaged. Big problem with this theory.
Plus the pictures clearly prove the height of the bleachers and people standing on them are in the direct line of sight.
2 Likes
Extremely weird. Why would it shift in the first cycle of the pressure pulse (but not in the other track)?
Also 50 samples is over a foot of shift in the pressure wave, in the middle of a vehicle?
Excellent work! Thank you.
2 Likes
I will let @bumblebeeez let you explain that one 
Thank you so much for all this work. Nothing about this looks like a recording of a natural signal.
There are a variety of noise sources. I think the lower frequency rumble is probably the car idling; the midrange is the AC fan; the high frequencies are police radio static. Some could be the microphone amps and ADCs, but probably not much. Not sure what else would be creating noise in the car. But the initial pressure waves of the shots look like they were created with a function generator with no noise at all (for the most part).
2 Likes
You mean like this interview? Iâm just saying. Then you also have to take into consideration the fallibility of human memory, which only gets worse over time. Witness testimony always has to be corroborated with other evidence to ascertain its veracity.
TXT at 17:38 â {Nicol} sends text to group text to Sniper Group about suspectâ
Witness Interview â ââThe first thing I did, I sent those pictures out [Fact: It was 24 minutes later, 5:14 pm to 5:38 pm.], we had a text group between the local snipers that were on the scene. I sent those pictures out to that group and advised them of what I noticed and what Iâd seen,â Nicol said. 'There was a text back that said, âCall it into command.â I then called into our to the command via radio. And they acknowledged.â âI assumed that there would be somebody coming out to â you know, to speak with this individual or, you know, find out whatâs going on,â he added.â (Source: ABC)
Boy, I donât know @roger-knight. Thatâs a stretch. I canât see the video, but the shot(s) would have to come from the top of the window to have any chance of clearing every obstacle. Also, the window isnât open in the picture you posted claiming it is.
I thought your trajectories were tracing back to the vent. You can get me in the vent easier than the window, but I have serious doubts about either. I was under the impression that your backtracking led to the vent, and the conspiracy of them being removed from the Steward video bolstered that suspicion.
1 Like
If thatâs the best youâve got itâs insufficient. Thatâs just one of many weird reflections due to old glass imperfections. We can easily see this in the Stewart video, all these windows have weird light reflections from various angles. Itâs clearly not open in any pictures or videos. Nobody saw them opened either. Police immediately looked at them too.
Also, somewhere an official determined these 1st floor windows are fixed, donât open. Sorry I canât recall, I didnât focus on it because none were observed in the open position so itâs a non-issue.
Even if they did open theyâd presumably be the old crank style like the 2nd story.
If you have any experience with those they are slow and not subtle. Those take a minute to obviously slowly open and shut. Literally impossible to do that and have a window open for sufficient time to aim and fire while being undetected. It would require several minutes to open, then set for aiming, then fire, then close, etc. Impossible. Even with assistance. All eyes were focused on that wall before during and after the shooting.
And again the audience is obviously directly in the way of any clear line of sight as we see from victim Copenhagenâs video.
1 Like
Copenhagenâs video does not show the audience is in the way between Trump on the podium and the 3rd window. That video is not a direct line up behind Trump. What it does prove is that the third window is visible from at least an angle southern of TrumpâŠ
And if we want to be gruesome, CC did get in the way at a certain point.
Further, we donât know which exact windows were checked. And, a permanent window is easily faked and replaced after the event. Itâs so easy it is a non-issue.
A replacement window is not the issue. It never opened. A glare on a window is not proof it opened. Itâs not open.
Paint us a plausible scenario where the window is opened wide enough to aim, fire, and close it in plain view yet not be seen. Show a single clean image of it opened. Shouldnât be hard, we have video of the entire wall at all times
And again this overlooks the FACTS The 3rd window is entirely obscured by the crowd and bleachers in the Copenhagen video. Extrapolating the location of others are even worse line of sight. And thereâs a 6 foot fence so the shooter would need to be elevated too, near the top of the window. Is he standing on a ladder as well??
The window theory is DOA.
We do not. We do not have a view of the entire wall at all times.
If you want to examine the third window and its freakish behavior at the times it is seen in the Stewert video before and after the shots, feel free.
Oh no, you live in a reality where people canât easily stand on things like a chair, table, etcâŠ
You sure do protest about the window. Perhaps thou doth protest too much.
One of the Washington county snipers appeared in the unofficial committee (the one with Cory Mills and Eli Crane) hearing a week ago. He specifically said he didnât take the shot and he didnât see the guy on the roof.
2 Likes
People keep pointing out issues with shootings spots on the front wall of Building 6. Everyone that spots an issue has a point. But the main issue is that audio analysis rules out the first three shots from being closer to the podium than Crooks. They MUST come from behind (but not 150 yards behind).
I had previously mentioned the roof of the building behind Crooks as a possibility. I have an improved spot. This breezeway behind the second building.
A) access from a courtyard that I believe is accessible from the sniper oversight building
B) one Hercules team is blocked by a tree and the other by Crooks himself
C) can raise up enough to make sure no cops are way out in the parking lot, but Crooks had drawn them close in
D) raise up a bit more, take three shots, drop down into the courtyard
E) disappear (back to your post)
And wasnât able to check the impact.
Thatâs literally not true.
Multiple people put the audio analysis, including experts, for the first 3 shots at 130 yards. That is in front of CrooksâŠcloser to the podium.
In fact, the only place it could be, is a window or vent from AGR6.
It also explains the difference in audio for the first 3.
1 Like
Donât know who those people are, but they are at best confused. Even the snick-boom folks canât place the first three shots that close.
And the arrival times for the non-podium sources receive the first three reports too soon for that to be true.
1 Like
Iâve seen 130 and 135 yd.
If youâre the same guy thatâs been posting and trying to push a theory that a 2nd shooter was someone further awayâŠdonât people keep telling you no way would that work??
Maybe you said it wouldnât work.
No one can say anything without placing at least one shot somewhere. Most people place the last five shots with Crooks; they came from the same location and five casings were found by him. If you are not one of those people then we are in wide disagreement. I place the last five with him.
If the first three came from closer, whatever distance was shortened to the podium, it was shortened LESS to the other mics because they were off that line (simple triangles). So the other mics would appear further away.
But the audio shows the opposite of that. They appear closer (except for TMZ, which loses a line of sight view to the shot location). Which means the shots had backed up along Crooksâ approximate line.
So donât know what those people are smokinâ, or who they are working for. If they are showing different arrival times, I have receipts.
Your enthusiasm is admirable, @roger-knight, but I canât concur with your conclusion. I did download your video and had a close look at it. Hereâs the thing, your video does show the point when shot 1 is fired. Itâs right at the 32 second mark, not the 23 second mark. See the civilian next to AGR 6 with his back up to it? He flinches when shot 1 is fired. Stewert flinches, too, and thatâs why his camera snaps upward to the tree leaves.
This is confirmed by a video I downloaded from the Peak Prosperity dropbox called âVideo footage moments before Donald Trump Rally assassination attemptâ. You can see where Stewart was at the moment of Shot 1 and watch him flinch.
And, as someone else mentioned, you really should use a higher-quality video source. Here are screen shots of two adjacent frames from the DJStew video I recorded from YouTube (before I learned about yt-dlp from a kind soul on this forum, thank you sir), and these images are much sharper than what you are presenting. Itâs clear that the window is closed and we are simply seeing a reflection in the corner. Sorry Roger.
3 Likes