Audio Analysis Raises Troubling Questions

News & Current Events Public News & Current Events
,
105

George Webb is a certified disinfo agent. He purposely muddied the Pizzagate story among many others.

But once I saw him in action on the pizzagate story, he’s been on triple secret probation with me.

But in that position, he serves a very useful purpose.

Whenever he says to look I believe I can exclude with 99% confidence. Hence the water tower…he was pointing at that so vigorously I immediately placed it lower on the analytical chain.

He won’t be completely off-track, ever, that’s now how professional water muddiers work.

Their job is to sprinkle in enough kernals of wheat with that chaff that the truth suffers.

11 Likes
106

My thoughts on the shooting sequence. But first the Biden regime careless how many Americans die especially MAGA.

First shooter was obviously trying to kill Trump and I have backed up many shooters in my Life and that is Shooter 2.

Shooter 1 takes the first 3 deliberate shots.

Shooter 2 realizes in angst that the target is not down. But is instructed to only fire upon Trump, when clear of SS. Because imagine the number of SS Whistleblowers, if SS agents were killed. Since the target wasnt down and wasn’t clear of the inner circle of SS agents, shooter 2 launched a barage of shots close to Trump, but into the Crowd. Purpose was to create Chaos, which could provide another clear shot opportunity at Trump. Since the Crowd didn’t panic or stampede another clear shot opportunity at Trump didn’t present itself.

11 Likes
107

I was trained in Russian propaganda and if you want to talk about disinformation, one would have a field day with the Chris Wray testimony. Nothing Wray said was helpful or meaningful.

And for extra points, since I never even entertained Conspiracy theories till Las Vegas. I have such a variety of skill sets that like this shooting, it was beyond apparent that the government narrative is/was BS.

I like Chris now was like a dog with a bone and I spent several weeks…20 hours days looking at everything I could find especially on the Internet.

Bottomline there is so much similarities between this shooting and Las Vegas, it would take me several hours to explain.

10 Likes
108

image
image667×552 110 KB

6 Likes
109

In listening to the audio between shots 3&4 I believe I’m hearing 2 additional shots that seem they are taken further away than any others. Because of the crowd noise you need to listen closely. Anyone else hear them?

Awesome analysis & reporting…!!
Tom~

1 Like
110

This white van, along with the body cam footage released brings water tower front and center to me.

111

I suggest we put aside the bullet snicks for a while and just focus on the gun reports. There are several unknown variables regarding sounds from the bullet. First, we are uncertain of it’s speed. Second, we are uncertain, at least in some cases, of the distance of bullet’s closest pass to the microphone. This is important, because the shock wave must travel at the speed of sound from a point along the bullet’s path that is uprange of the mic. For a bullet travelling at 2 to 2.5x the speed of sound, this means an ordinary sound wave must travel about twice the distance from the mic to the bullet’s closest pass, which reduces the delay of the report by an uncertain amount of time.

I suggest we look at relative differences in arrival time of the gun report at different microphones as Chris did in one of his earliest video. For example, I did a rough analysis on Google Earth of the distances from mic 2 and mic 4 both to Crooks and the closest open 2nd floor window to Crooks. This is what I found:

Distance (ft) Mic 2 Mic 4
Crooks 329 241
Window 363 150
difference -34 91

diff mic2-mic4 125 ft

shift in time difference between sound arrival times for guns at the two different locations from mic 2 to 4: 0.10 seconds.

Because of the greater distance to Crooks, the sound from a gun in Crooks position will arrive later in the sequence at mic4 and earlier in the sequence at mic 2.

All we need is a single shot at a known location to calibrate the timing, or better yet, 2 shots, one early and one later in the series to correct for timing drift between the two videos.

2 Likes
112

yes. I agree entirely with all you say

113

@ Jennifer Zunigajenz did is a nice job of this a few days ago.

Solari Reports Money & Markets with Catherine Austin Fits and John Titus. Spectacular theater

—gross incompetence by the Secret Service

—gross incompetence on the part of the assassin

—divine intervention protecting DJT

Images and video from event:

—time stamps on videos indicate that for over 40 minutes the counter snipers are focussing in on sniper’s “nest”, they never take eyes off the roof. No way they did not see sniper on roof.

—multiple rally attendees warning, pointing, acknowledging, calling out to police about the sniper (Crooks) on the roof (plenty of time to eliminate the threat)

—plenty of time for the counter snipers who must’ve seen sniper to respond, and for orders to be give to get Trump off the stage. The normal protocol would be to get the president off the stage, and if you see a sniper you take him out (shoot him), because you would already know he wasn’t supposed to be there.

—Trump, right before shot, asks the audience “do you mind if I go off teleprompter?” and told audience to look up onto a big screen where he showed data points regarding migrant invasion. It is rare for this kind of screen to be used at these rallies, and it is unusual timing to direct everyones attention (with their cameras) away from him and to the screen off to the side. (MY NOTE: reminds me of a magic trick. Look over there, not at me)

—so, both counter snipers (didn’t take out/shoot sniper) and secret service didn’t follow protocol (get president off stage).

—The first three shots fired were not fired by the sniper. The video shows that the first three shots, according to the time stamps on the videos and video of the counter snipers, they are actually shots fired by the counter snipers. One of the counter sniper’s (there are 2) rifles display visible recoil after each shot fired. The timing of the first three shots fired and the counter sniper’s recoil match perfectly.

—It is strange that there weren’t other counter snipers on the other dozen, or so, nearby roofs.

—there is video of the security detail working to “set up” the “Iwo Jima” photo, as they call it due to the fact that it highly resembles the staged photo of the flag raising photo at Iwo Jima. In the video, we see Trump’s security detail surround him in such a way that they are allowing the now iconic photo to be taken, instead of covering him in the usual way to protect him. In a situation as this they would normally never give a potential second shooter a 30-40 second window to get such a clear direct second shot at both chest and head. In these events security teams plan as if there will be a second shooter involved. This exposure to a threat would not have happened following the first hit. It appears in the video that they are “setting up” for the photo op. Interesting side note, the flag in the photo is upside down.

—The NYT “wizzing bullet” photo. Interestingly, it was taken by the same photographer (Mills) who took the photo of President George Bush at the elementary school classroom when he was receiving the news of 9/11. The camera that apparently took the wizzing bullet photo was set at 1/8000 of a second, and upon analyzing the photograph, the bullet “wiz length” measures around 1-1/12 feet long which would mean it would travel twice as fast as a commercially bullet/rifle combo anywhere. You’d have to go to a navy type gun that doesn’t even use gun powder to fire, it uses electric charge to fire, to get 1/8000feet per second, and in the photo the streak is longer than a foot, so…. anyhow it’s a bit more technical, but that’s basically it. A lucky shot/photo, no pun intended. Further, to have a waif of a kid get his hands on this type of rifle and actually pulling it off, not plausible. Boys a patsy.

—very little blood on Trump’s hand. There should’ve been more blood flow, no blood on white shirt.

—Based on previous experience with Trump, the notion that in the middle of an assassination attempt he would expose his head and body for 30-40 seconds doesn’t add up.

—Trump is a smart man. He owned casinos, was part of the wrestling community, had his reality TV show. He’s a showman. He was also on the morning of 9/11 explaining the falling building pancakes theory, referring to how the towers fell, implying he was in on the cover-up. He’s part of the power structure. On that note, he also has ties with Jeffrey Epstein.

—Trump’s supports crypto guys. This event was a bellwether event. Referring previously to an article in Foreign Affairs, it looked like all the factions had made their deal and come together around Trump and were moving forward together. Staging an event like this would take all the factions coming together.

—Timing is suspicious. Happens right before Republican Convention, and right as all the law fare against Trump is coming apart at the seams.

—The “factions” have Trump in a box. It is not the president that runs the country.

2 Likes
114

Thank you Chris. Here are some points it would be very useful to address:

1. Back-to-back presentation of the contrast between volley #1 (shots 1-3) and volley #2 (shots 4-8) from all available sources.

The most compelling evidence for two shooters is also the simplest-- the fact that volley #1 (shots 1-3) and volley #2 (shots 4-8) sound different (on some sources). You should drill into this more. Please just create an audio clip containing all shots from each source-- ideally cut out the interval separating the volleys (as you did in this vid). Then just go through and play this clip for each source.

We need to see how robust is the observation that volley #1 and volley #2 sound different across different mics. If multiple sources held by different people near the same location all manifest a similar difference, that is compelling evidence.

2. Systematic presentation of objections to two-shooter hypothesis.

Let’s assume that the observation of different sounding volleys 1 and 2 is robust. Then we need to consider and rule out other explanations than “two shooters”. For example:

  • Could a difference in how a shooter was holding the gun for each volley plausibly create the different sounds?
  • Could a difference in ammunition account for the different sounds?
  • Could a difference in background noise change the digital processing of the shots in each volley to account for the different sounds?
  • Etc.

3. Talk to NYT’s gunfire acoustics expert, Robert C. Maher.

Here’s an excerpt from a 7/13 NYT article: https://web.archive.org/web/20240715015058/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/13/us/politics/trump-rally-shooting-suspect-video.html

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.

You should reach out to Mr. Maher and find out (a) on what basis did he conclude “no significant difference”; (b) how he would explain the obvious difference in sound you presented between volleys 1 and 2.

3 Likes
115

With the mountain of elements validating the idea that Trump is a deep state asset, it would seem more ridiculous that the ds would want to assassinate Trump. If the ds pulled the 9/11 false flag they can certainly stage the grazing of Trump’s ear.

116

@cmartenson you ask for videos and pictures from near the buildings. Couldn’t it also be interesting to have videos from the other side where Trump stood? Perhaps we van spot some dust of bullits hitting the ground or something else?

3 Likes
117

The reason why Chris thinks it’s insane that the assassination could have been staged is because Chris doesn’t believe that Trump is a deep state asset but he hasn’t refuted this hypothesis. I would like to see thorough refutation of this hypothesis. Everybody that I have heard refuting this hypothesis said that a shooter couldn’t have aimed at Trump’s ear without taking the risk of killing him (which I agree with), but what if no shot were fired at Trump? Could it still have been staged? I think so.

118

True, although I would not refute an hypothesis on the only basis that a disinfo agent mentioned it. A lot of disinfo also uses reverse psychology. That’s how they built the perception that Trump is an enemy of the deep state while he’s likely a deep state asset.

119

I have not listened to this video yet, but just this morning on NPR news they said that the FBI found all 8!!! Shell casings on roof by shooter and that all bullets are accounted for. Unbelievable!

1 Like
120

A suggestion from an AI. What do you guys think?

Using a limiter and gate can be a clever way to manipulate the microphone’s signal and create the illusion of a subsonic wave.

A limiter can help to:

  1. Suppress high-frequency content: By limiting the signal’s amplitude, you can reduce the high-frequency components and create a more subtle, low-frequency-heavy signal.
  2. Create a “soft clip”: A limiter can introduce a soft clipping effect, which can help to create a gentle, rounded waveform that resembles a subsonic wave.

A gate (or noise gate) can be used to:

  1. Create a threshold for signal passage: By setting a threshold level, you can control when the signal is allowed to pass through the gate. This can help to create a sense of a low-frequency wave “pulsing” or “breathing”.
  2. Enhance low-frequency content: A gate can be used to selectively allow low-frequency signals to pass through, while attenuating higher frequency components.

By combining a limiter and gate, you can create a more subtle and nuanced signal that mimics the characteristics of a subsonic wave. Here’s an example of how you could configure the limiter and gate:

  1. Set the limiter to reduce the signal’s amplitude by 6-12 dB, with a relatively slow attack time (around 10-30 ms) and a longer release time (around 100-200 ms).
  2. Set the gate to have a relatively low threshold level (around -20 dB to -30 dB), with a moderate attack time (around 10-30 ms) and a longer release time (around 100-200 ms).

By adjusting the limiter and gate settings, you can create a signal that has a more subtle, pulsing quality, which can be perceived as a subsonic wave. Keep in mind that the specific settings will depend on the type of microphone, the desired intensity of the subsonic wave, and the overall audio signal chain.

Remember, the goal is to create a signal that is perceived as a low-frequency vibration, rather than an audible sound. Experiment with different settings and techniques to achieve the desired effect.

121

Shoot 9 came from the sniper located near stage (from the second roof) and shoot 10 came from the window of the building where SS snipers spotted Crooks through the window, thats what I see. The shooter from the water tower was unable to get clear shoot even he was seen on that building as shown on the video

1 Like
122

That was my first hypothesis to explain shots 1-3 sounding differently than 4-8. But the John Cullen video reference above (minute 52 to 1:09) claims that the shot #1 is the one that seems to graze multiple people/objects in the top rung of the bleacher to Trump’s left (hits first man in white pants/shirt and red cap, then a woman’s purse, then shirt of man with blue jeans/white shirt, then man with the American flag draped over, then railing). The line connecting this extends but never towards Crooks or the AGR building, but to some tree canopies that stand on Crooks’ left whereas the 2nd floor AGR window is to Crooks’ right. So that first shot would seem not to have originated in the AGR 2nd floor.

123

I compared your Fox video shot 6-8 analysis with Mike Adams’ analysis. Adams interprets shots 6 and 7 as overlapping, with shot 7 muzzle blast having 2 echoes. Fully expanded sound wave patterns show that Adams is correct. That might account for some of your questions regarding those shots.

Shot Comparison
Shot Comparison1920×2173 234 KB

124

Sometimes people are just mistaken, without being “deep state assets”. But we can identify debate tactics that are typical of disinformation.

Nobody on this site has ever said that there were no bullets fired, or that nobody was killed. Nobody has ever argued that the fake assassins deliberately aimed to hit Trump’s ear, either. But time and time again, these arguments are put up as straw men, and then knocked down. It’s getting tiresome.

3 Likes