This is the location of the recording device that we call “device number 1”. Not Trump’s microphone.
The audio we heard in the “Main video” It comes from this microphone, not Trump’s microphone.
In fact, Trump’s microphone is not the recording device for any camera. Trump’s microphone simply amplifies the sound around him and emits it through the speakers.
That is, the audio we hear in the main video comes from this microphone, which is quite far from the main microphone. Although of course, this microphone will be picking up much of the sound that sounds through the speakers, But the location is very different.
3 Likes
what sort of device is that? first time seeing a microphone like that.
It is for TV camera. For live streaming
https://x.com/ShadowofEzra/status/1818699902865547603
this is the one i found. def edited by fox
found out
its a tracking camera. not a microphone. Usually they could get a mic input from trumps microphone if the AV team allows it for major news channels to get the clarity of the speech.
It could also be captured by the microphone in the camera but i dont see any mic attachment there.
I haven’t been following the details of the audio analysis, but this seems like it could be very important. Has most of the audio analysis to date been done based on a misconception about where the mic was?
No. It only affects the audio of the main video, or video number 1. It does not affect in any way the videos that people recorded with their mobiles.
1 Like
But this microphone is of much higher quality, wide range, and reliability of recording audio than microphones on people’s mobiles on the ground. It is also in a higher position without obstacles to capture audio. It is surely the most reliable source to analyze, although the shots are somewhat distant and sound small…
Well, I think a lot of people think that some early recording happened at Trump’s mic, and they scoot the other recordings around to line up with that. It’d be interesting if that wasn’t true, that the audio they thought they were hearing at Trump’s mic was actually offset from the stage.
1 Like
Yes. That’s exactly it. There is no cable connected to the audio input, there is an optical cable Which I guess will be outgoing…
There is also another TV camera right next to this clunker
Exactly. And in addition, Trump’s microphone, whose audio comes out of the speakers, is getting into all the cameras, both television and mobiles. It just depends on whether they are closer or farther away from the speakers
If we have 3 microphones or more where position is known, and there is something to sync the sound to (that is not the shots) then triangulating the shorts report is really not that hard.
Ha ha ha how could you find that strange device so quickly?))
reverse image search on just the equipment inside yellow box.
full search of image didnt do much.
it wasnt looking anything like a mic since i have seen most type of microphones for studio. so was curious to find out.
Gary Melton interviews two eyewitnesses. The first is Jon Malis, the guy who took the video of Crooks as he sat up to shoot at the building 6 crowd just before the SS took him out. Also in this video Gary talks about a call he had with a sound engineer who is 100% convinced there were 2 weapons used for shots 1-8. It’s long, but Malis is sharp and offers a lot of good information about the event and topics covered in this forum.
1 Like
In this second interview, Gary Melton talks with the “motorcycle guy,” who was in the same location as Dave Stewart. Again, it’s long, but it provides more good first hand eyewitness information about topics covered in this forum.
Ep81 Partial summary
All bullet points besides ‘interviewer’ is what Jon Malis is saying:
- Walking at the back of bldg, 3 shots were fired followed by the other 5.
- Was working with an investigator that was doing an investigation for Senator Chuck Grassley’s office. They did an analysis of the video and determined all shots were from the same weapon. Malis agreed that he thinks it was 1 shooter.
- Lines to get into the event were too long for him to wait at 1pm already, around 20k people there, so he drove around to find an alternative vantage point. He found the fence area where the video was taken. No security there either.
- Once the rally started people were yelling '“hey! there’s a guy over there!” he’s walking on this, he’s crawling on that, pointing up at the roof.’ but Jon didn’t pay much attention. 1 min later heard someone yelling to get the police. 5 officers quickly showed up and surrounded the building to look at the guy on the roof. One police officer pulled out a service weapon. Jon started walking away and that’s when he started recording.
- While recording the first 3 shots rang out, then he spun his camera around and another 5 went off. Then heard a counter sniper shot and finally the kill shot you hear last.
- There was no chance people were on the lower level of AGR bldg. The building is below ground with the hill sloping down towards it, and the chain link fence in the way as well. Not even a line of sight, would have been below the stage shooting up.
- Cops couldn’t see Crooks because too close to bldg.
- Pretty sure the ladder was SS and not Crooks’.
- Cops propped up to look at him and crooks aimed at him
- Muses why counter snipers didn’t take the shot and about Crooks experience/techniques on taking the shot and more such as using the gun on its side to stay low and concealed. Not going to bother noting because this is nothing he witnessed. (19mins in).
- Interviewer mentions a high level Hollywood audio person contacted him saying there were 2 different sound signatures there (i.e. different guns).
- Mentions the follow up shots from the alleged ear shot were all over the place, saying if he was good enough to hit Trumps ear then the follow-up shots would’ve been within 2 ft of 1st shot but they were no way near. (My perspective: More credence to the ‘no bullet hitting Trump’ theory. I think none of the shots went near Trump.)
- Crooks aimed the weapon at ‘us’ right before he was shot.
- Thinks Crooks was concealed by using his gun sideways for the first 3 shots and then for the next 5 he had moved into a prone position which made him visible to be shot.
I stopped watching at 38 mins because the interviewer liked the sound of his own voice too much but this transcript could save you that time.
One suggestion to people who upload videos – if you have the time, do a brief summary of the topics covered. It’d save people a lot of time and make it easy to reference specific parts of the dialogue.
I’m out.
This forum is deteriorating into and bitch fest of competing factions and probably planted counterintel types. I wish Chris all the best with his investigation.
This was a planned op. No doubt in my mind.
They did NOT allow it to happen, they MADE it happen.
The question is, who ordered the hit and who are the co-conspirators.
The more they lie and cover up, the more likely that they ARE the co-conspirators.
Where shots 1 2 3 come from is interesting but irrelevant. The fact is they were pro shots done by either a human or a machine. If you don’t think that is possible, think again.
Remember, this evil cabal has had at least 60 years since they did this to John F Kennedy to perfect their murderous craft. They have the inside track on the most advanced classified technology on the planet. If you don’t think that they game-played this out to the n’th degree, then you are not paying attention. Take Bruce Willis in The Jackal, blend in AI and just for good measure throw in ultra precise micro surgery type servos onto trigger control and barrel positioning of a rifle, based on super hi-def camera and shape recognition software and there you have it… The plot for the next hollywood shoot 'em up psyop.
With all that was at stake, including hundreds of billions in put option profits, whoever ordered this hit would not risk it on a kid with issues. No way.
So there was at least one more source for those 3 first shots.
They will try again. They have no choice.
3 Likes
wow. straight from a.i.'s mouth…
Faking a presidential assassination would be extremely complex, illegal, and unethical. However, if we break down the hypothetical steps for purely academic purposes, it would involve several intricate stages:Planning: Extensive planning to create a believable scenario. This would include understanding security protocols, the president’s schedule, and potential locations.Personnel: Assembling a team with various skills such as actors, special effects experts, and possibly insiders with access to secure areas.Diversion: Creating diversions to distract the Secret Service and other security agencies. This could involve staged incidents or false alarms.Execution: Simulating the event using realistic special effects, such as squibs (small explosive devices used to simulate gunfire wounds) and carefully choreographed actions.Media Manipulation: Controlling or influencing the media to report the fake event as real. This might involve hacking, misinformation campaigns, or bribing journalists.Aftermath: Managing the aftermath to maintain the illusion. This would require controlling information, possibly faking injuries or a fake recovery period, and dealing with investigations
1 Like