I don’t know if you know this detail, but Stewart was arrested and his phone was with the police for days, I think 3 or 4. I am just speculating here, but if they simply offset the audio by 1 second and gave the phone back to Stewart, I think it would explain a lot of things…
1 Like
His name is Stewert.
sorry, I edited my post…
False. The video proves it.
It’s only bizarre if this is your first day on planet Earth and never seen windows, especially really old apparently aluminum framed windows like these on this old AGR complex, appear to be. Guessing that window is 2-3 decades old minimum.
Windows are glass and can have imperfections. This window does have a imperfection causing a odd light streak.
Or you can continue to believe a magical levitating assassin and his leprechaun invisible helper opened the window in a fraction of a second, undetected, fired over the fence and thru the crowd/bleachers standing taller than the windows, and then closed the window without any cops, witnesses, or videos capturing them.
So rather than simply “lose” his phone or “delete” the video, which would be super harmful to the deep state if the windows were proving a 2nd shooter, they went into it and thru the hassles of moving the audio, to throw of the scent?
Oiy vey.
1 Like
Oh, like we should believe your theory that a 2nd sniper was traipsing “somewhere” on the roof unseen even though there are multiple videos of the rooftop prior to the shooting from the bodycams and police cars?
Perhaps Crooks passed by him and maybe they did a fast Fortnite dance off and then resumed their assassin activities.
Thanks, no thanks, if there is a second shooter, I’m sticking with AGR6 window 3.
I do not believe it is, firstoff.
2nd point, you’re looking at it all wrong, from a profile view, the tip top of the window frame against the tip top of the bleacher structure.
Window. So a person would need to be on a stable elevated platform exactly to the top height of the useful open window frame. What is that about 9 feet? I don’t see that as possible/practical.
Bleachers. Now add at least several feet height with layers of people, many holding up rally signs, all acting in unpredictable movements.
THERE IS NO SHOOTING LANE even in the best case window scenario. One can barely see the outline of the top 10% of the 3rd window in this still photo from the shooting victim. A assassin could lay there for 3 hours and not get a good shooting lane. There’s layers of standing people, clapping, holding up signs, moving to and fro, etc. in unpredictable patterns. There IS NO SHOOTING LANE from the windows.
1 Like
Your gaslighting doesn’t work on me. My eyes and brain work.
But I think it’s hilarious that you thought it made sense to put two snipers on the same rooftop.
There is only one reason Crooks was on that roof: he’s (was) a dumb kid who was told to be there. A second sniper would NEVER join him on top of that roof.
Trained snipers take their shots from well hidden places with escape routes. /cough like from within a building that they have direct control of
We actually don’t have any good clear videos of the far 2nd story rooftop other than what appears to possibly be a person’s head poking up in the Coperhagen video. The boosted officer video is the only other that shows that roof but the shooting was over by the time that video comes into view, from my recollection having watched it hoping we’d have some evidence.
But in the Coperhagen vid we have a possible lead of someone’s head poking up and going out of view. I’ll readily admit it might not be a person but video flaw, artifact, building structure, etc. because I’m open to the truth not married to a nonsense theory easily disproven.
1 Like
My theory hasn’t been disproven yet. When it is actually disproven by evidence that hasn’t been fabricated or tampered with, then I’ll drop it as viable.
Until then, I like the theory of AGR6 window 3 if there was a second shooter. /shrug It is what it is.
And meanwhile, I’ll ignore people like you, trying to gaslight other people’s own eyes.
Well, the window simply doesn’t open, there’s no evidence it was ever opened at key times (all captured on video), no way for a shooter to practically get elevated in the room because rooms don’t have 8’ tall tables and benches typically, there would be on video and dozens of witnesses including law enforcement, and Stewart himself, and there’s literally no shooting lane between the window and Trump. But you are free to believe in whatever theories you want no matter how far afield and disproven they are.
It’s like you don’t even listen.
If this was an inside job, that window was setup to open and to close quickly, most likely a removable temporary pane does the trick. It is ridiculously easy to do that when you have control of the building before, during, and after the event. Then the window is replaced with a permanent pane afterwards. I’ve already stated this theory many times.
Nobody was checking that window.
Multiple aspects of the entire security setup leading up to and during the attempt scream inside job. It wouldn’t stop with those glaring actions, or inactions, as they were.
It would most likely include a second shooter in a theory similar to what I’ve put out there. It’s literally not far fetched at all. It’s an easy basic plan.
Hi Rough_Country_Gypsy,
I understand your confusion. Let me try to explain:
As you know I have been evaluating many numbers with KHunter lately and he was able to find surprisingly a lot of small inconsistencies. As you know whenever we had to decide for a number, we took the benefit of the doubt for crooks and we tried to get up as high as possible, otherwise people would be claiming that we are pushing the numbers for our 2-shooter theory. Then KHunter drew his attention to the stage height which made me unsure. His height was considerably lower than what we had. This made think that maybe we are a bit high in our trajectory and when updating some numbers I saw the tendency that the back traced bullet was pointing more back down to window 3 than Vent 3. This is actually the reason why I started to focus on window 3, because all the time I was watching vent 3 and not window 3. I was however convinced from @bumblebeeez that there was possible path from window 3.
Then I looked at body cam BWC2-122110 and could see mysterious activity coming out of window 3. Then @phasefive drew the attention that we could also see the same in Stewart’s video, of which I confirmed with today’s video.
3 seconds before shots are fired, window 3 changes the status from a closed window with a reflecting red colour coming from the red barns which are on the opposite side, to a (half) open window with no more reflections and no more rope.
As for the line it is clear according to the simulation and according to the latest numbers discussed with Khunter the back traced bullet is showing back towards that position.
Adding Chris’s 3 buffered shots without echoes, everything adds up and now we have alleged video evidence that backs everything up perfectly!
hi @greg_n.
Here is the location I found for NTD:
586690.64 m E; 4523404.18 m N
I cross referenced with RSBN position which I used 15 references points to locate with more precision (RSBN new position: 586683.94 m E ; 4523383.19 m N):
The camera men from RSBN can be seen here in the middle, and he is aligned with the pole on the other side of the lake:
Here is the map with the locations and my ref points:
1 Like
A shot from these windows could not have hit Trump’s ear and then the railing at the same time.
Your assumption presupposes the kayfabe theory.
That is why Mike Bell, for example, did not consider this possibility in his videos.
It would be interesting to know if audio analysis can really rule out this location for a second shooter.
1 Like
I have fully read every word of your theory and when it was first presented 5+ weeks ago with the ‘flash of light’ my curiosity was peaked. I did a DEEP DIVE INTO THESE WINDOWS.
Sorry pal, the evidence proves they did not ever open, nor was there ever sufficient unobserved opportunity, nor is it a practical firing position unless that room has some 9’ tall flat structure (maybe a big flat machine or something), but a big problem is no shooting line. People are simply in the way. These are elementary concepts.
Look Stewart’s video is just a starting point. We also have many eye witnesses including no fewer than several cops in uniform and undercover. We have the woman on the horse immediately beforehand. We have Stewart himself and whoever was with him. There’s several others in the video. Nobody saw a window open or close.
Probably 20 sets of eyeballs on these windows, directly or in periphery to a point that a open window would be OBVIOUS. People were scanning for threats.
Your concept of some magical window opening and closing in an instant demonstrates a total lack of firearms, aimed shots, timing, etc. None of that is going to work in the real world. Might work in fantasy hollywood in a movie script but in the real world it’s just far too complex and impractical to impossible.
I deal in evidence, facts. Not conjecture and improbable theories.
I agree it was probably an inside job. But these operations are designed to be low-work, low evidence trail, not complex. Complex plans have too many points of failure.
The window theory has 50 points of failure. To include, no shooting lane, too many witnesses, some predictably with cameras, windows that don’t open and would need to be replaced before hand and swapped back afterwards, then a 9’ platform in the room, a helper in the room to remove and replace the window undetected, and on and on and on.
The vent theory is plausible. The 2nd story AGR windows are plausible. The 2nd story roof is plausible. Because they’re all fairly simple, the vents are the most complex but plausible. But zero chance the shots were from any of those obviously closed windows that have no shooting lanes.
3 Likes
Do you understand “science” and “controls?” If you do, you’ll understand this. Your first picture is from a radically different angle than your 2nd picture. They are also plagued by being cherry picked snapshots from a moving video camera that is moving both in terms of depth and laterally.
This discussion cannot be captured effectively with still images that can be easily manipulated entirely out of context. It requires video context. Go watch the video, frame by frame. At all times (with minor breaks of 1 to maybe 3 or 5 seconds at most) these windows are all in and out of view as Stewart scans left and right continually and in an unbroken fashion.
There is simply NO TIME for a person to fling open a window and allow shooting to happen and then fling it shut without being observed or someone observing the action, the window open, the person opening it, etc.
Witnesses, cops, video, etc. nothing captures that activity which would be obvious.
3 Likes
The whole point is that my theory is simple and easy to perform.
I don’t know what your deal is, but you are being intellectually dishonest and outright making claims in numerous posts that are easily proven false. You are trying to gaslight to the max and that’s just giving off super weird vibes. Ignoring you now, pal.
1 Like