@raulund
I cannot access this video, it says it has been removed?
1 Like
yeah seems that account got nuked. holy shit.
people if you get a hold of evidence, download it. you’re basically preserving a piece of history.
5 Likes
I’m not sure if this has been posted-
This is a video of the officer that peeked over the roof merged with his dash cam.
It’s 95 seconds after the last shot before G. Nichols exits the building, quite casually I might add.
The officer that peeked over the roof is Officer Glasgow, the same officer that met up with Dave Stewart at 10 at night.
3 Likes
Secret service lied again!
This Audio analysis that triangulates the location of the shooter while not perfect rules out Hercules 1 and 2 as the sniper who took out Crooks.
Far more likely to be the same gunman who shot #9.
This is evidence that the sniper teams had stand down orders. Also accounts for the lack of brain splatter.
8 Likes
Interestingly enough, according to Rowe there were 150 “security” personnel in attendance that day. A combination of FBI, SS and Homeland Security.
According to Cheatle there were 2 SS assigned to the AGR building, but we only see one - who comes down the hallway of the AGR building with Officer Tedeski quite awhile after the last shots are fired.
Butler/Beaver say over and over they had no direct communication with SS.
So I ask, did they not know he was in the building?
7 Likes
There seems to be a lot of discrepancy about this point. May I ask, if an officer sees a real threat that he is unable to engage, can this officer fire his weapon to signal other officers of an emergency?
2 Likes
Strictly prohibited.
2 Likes
no known agency in the United States has that kind of protocol.
Bodycam video from the officer on the roof (after Crooks has been shot):
Bodycam officer: “Did he get himself or did they get him from over here?” (timestamp 18:25:26) This question caught my attention. What made the officer ask this question? If he were shot from the front, this officer wouldn’t have to ask that question would he? It would be obvious wouldn’t it?
SS agent responds: points toward the stage area but inaudible (im assuming hes pointing at the sniper team with the tree obstruction)
SWAT officer response: “Behind the building.” (very matter of factly makes this statement) as he looks to his right (south of crooks)
SS agent
Looks behind him in the same direction (s of crooks) but has no comment or argument for the SWAT officer’s statement.
Bodycam officer
“okay”
This conversation leads me to believe that Crooks was actually shot from behind. I’m sure the SWAT officer who’s been standing over Crooks’ body is knowledgeable enough to tell where he was shot & from which direction.
Censorship is such a bad thing. We need to see the body in order to answer this question.
Also, being shot in the head, one would assume he would die upon impact right? So,where did all that blood come from? Doesn’t the body stop bleeding once the heart stops? Im not a Dr. nor am I Coroner, I’m just a simple woman with eyes to observe & questions to ask.
Bodycam Source:
Gray Hughes Investigates
Crazy! Watch clips all put together!
(YT)
Gray Hughes states in this video that a lot of the videos we’ve been seeing are much shorter than the actual video thats out there, due to censorship on YT. (In this bodycam video the body/face is not blurred, however doesn’t actually show many details).
If anyone has any insight they would like to share, I would be very grateful for your assistance in understanding wtHECK I just observed. Thnx 
1 Like
Doctors on PP have confirmed that the heart will continue to pump, I believe one said until about half the blood has pumped out.
Edit: My memory failed me, the heart will pump all the blood out acording to this post.
2 Likes
For the cop that was hoisted up to the roof and saw a gun, wouldn’t it have made sense to go back to his car and flip on the lights and siren?
5 Likes
No that doesn’t do anything. He should have got on his radio (like he did), but the questionable part is him taking 10 seconds to sprint to his car, and completely ignore the rifle, instead he chose to rush into an open green field while he’s in a black uniform, and not take cover by the building or behind the trees. man was straight up suicidal.
1 Like
Greg? Ah lot of attention on roof? Ah is it proceedure to zip a corpse? I have to get eyes tested for glasses to look at M.C. bear crawling and hair of said corpse? Dan Bon had said a 400+ K.shot. So, Chris, what is your forensics on the head and blood? All still baffling to me? I have other qs. I am glad that Chris is widening the scope of questions. I think some mystery in this story needs to stay. It is not here but in the crowd behind Pres T and remarks sometime after. This is Manchurian. I think we need to observe it, flush the DS. Also, the mobile LEO is the one on his phone, is the one not involved who happens to be the lead camera footage, asking if Chris is ok. Add some etcs. I doubt one law enforcement would believe much of this, even the FBI who is so casual as he navigates the roof and seems nonchalant.
I am more focused on Pres T being +ively elected, and his impact on the world, and the coup in 2020; but also what next: I pray that people look to the King of kings, who makes kings for his purpose. I have little time for the prophets who endorse each other. I am amazed that we are intell distracted constantly, with open defiance of rule of law by near all in power. I know that my remarks are unappealing, but it remains true that when the US falls, so the world follows, that it is a lead up to the end, and we ask Jesus to come quick, not out of fear, but love of God, our children and the oikos of God (econ/admin of His house/hold). Somebody must have video of the crowd moving in as well? Maybe we should let the chap who washed his hands alone, and Greg too, and? I think I need to sell my old record player. And change my name to Baffled! Somehow I don’t think the young man was just stupid???
I wonder how different this analysis would be if shots 1-3 were considered as a separate cluster from shots 4-8.
(starting at 8:26 in the video)
2 Likes
Dropbox 1340_202407131858_Unit4-0 (video #7 atm)
@reneroos provided this Judicial Watch Dropbox link to 12 videos. It could be productive for the PP community to review them, so in this post on video #7 I offer a transcription of the key parts, a possible interpretation, and several questions.
The stakes could be high, because the audio suggests both intent to cover up and an unofficial plan by BC ESU/SWAT to subvert the official plan for BC ESU/SWAT. Each of these potentially nefarious moments is boldened below, if you wish to skip ahead.
It’s all based on overlapping and independent conversations captured by a dashcam, with the important conversation having only one person’s voice audible (the conversation’s other person’s voice is via cell phone inaudible to the dashcam). Unfortunately, this means one needs to clarify which conversation is who, which one to focus on, what to logically surmise that is unheard, and the step back and try to interpret the motivations.
-
At first watch, the dashcam video involves “Cruiser LEO” driving citizens/witnesses away from AGR for protection from the bomb squad’s imminent work there, followed by “Cruiser LEO” driving alone back to the AGR parking lot, doing nothing but let the radio comms drone on until bomb squad is done.
-
The juice starts at minute 23:15 of the 24:55-long video.
-
“Cruiser LEO” is one of two voice protagonists. Visually, I think it is this guy around 7:11:32 in front of the cruiser’s dashcam:
The reason I think so is that right after these imaged moments, the guy walks toward the driver’s door and disappears from dashcam view, the cruiser’s door is recorded closing, and the cruiser is seen driving away immediately after. So it must be this guy who just entered the cruiser, closed the door, and drove away.
Twenty uneventful* minutes go by (see asterisk at bottom) while the cruiser is parked in the eastern AGR lot, which is empty owing to the bomb’s squad imminent work in AGR:
Its a curious fact that the cruiser originally left this area for safety but now is back, rather than having stayed northwest of AGR next to many other LEOs. I think one reason is a desire for extra privacy; for another reason, see asterisk below.
- 7:21:35-38: Cruiser LEO is ringing someone with his cell phone. The ring repeats every two seconds.
Before and after this moment there are 2-3 voices heard over cruiser’s radio communicating among themselves: one offering help to the bomb squad, another a bomb squad rep, and third one a coordinator, possibly Greg Nicol based on his voice in this ABC News interview (front row, tattooed arm, bald, beard). These three people will not converse with Cruiser LEO or his phone call counterpart, and what they say to one another is not necessary to appreciate they two highlights below between Cruiser LEO and his phone counterpart. Most of what the three-way radio voices say is transcribed below, nevertheless, for the purpose of allowing the reader here who also follows the dashcam’s audio recording to know what voices belong to whom, what voices are addressed to whom, what messages are to be ignored (three-way radio), and what messages are to be focused on (the cell phone duo). If you are just listening, it’s hard to distinguish who is talking to whom and what voice is whose, but the transcription below should clarify.
Cruiser LEO leaves the radio on, to monitor what is going on, but save for a few moments, seems to keep his radio’s mic off, because the radio voices never acknowledge or reply to what Cruiser LEO says as recorded by his dashcam.
- 7:21:40: Cell phone call has been picked, because Cruiser LEO’s phone ring has stopped.
Just one second before, a radio voice similar to Greg Nicol’s replies to an offer of help, “Negative, we’re in the East side in the back …” (Do you think this matches the voice in the ABC News interview, at 1:35-2:17, definitely identified as Greg Nicol’s? To my ears, it matches.)
At 7:21:40, Cruiser LEO’s private phone conversation has started, as he initiates or replies, “Yup, AGR south side … (pause) … on the south side? … Okay … (pause for radio clutter to pass) … yeah, I’m in the car, right up the parking lot, for cover, because of the … maybe possible explosive, so …” It’s 7:21:45 now.
In these 5 seconds, two things are happening: parallel and separate conversation over the radio, and pauses. The pauses are when Cruiser LEO’s phone counterpart is speaking. His/her speech is not recorded by the cruiser’s dashcam, because Cruiser LEO must be holding his cell phone right to his ear. I did not catch any mention of his/her name.
-
7:22:05-20 : Greg Nicol-alike coordinator’s voice over radio says, “You can bring him down to AGR and I’ll talk to him, see where they wanna set up” … another radio voice asks, “Are they still clearing the building?” … another radio voice replies, “Affirmative, they’re still clearing the building, they do have one *** on the west side.”
-
7:22:21 Cruiser LEO: “Hey, are you still recording on your body camera?”
… silence for a good 3.5 seconds …
My interpretation is that, during this silence, his phone counterpart turns the bodycam off and replies, “Was recording” … the dashcam cannot pick up counterpart’s voice in cell phone, hence the silence in the dashcam recording.
- 7:22:28: Cruiser LEO, not counterpart, asserts, “Was.”
It’s odd that Cruiser LEO just apparently replied to his own question. My interpretation is that, in the preceding silence, the actual reply came from the phone counterpart but the dashcam only records Cruiser LEO’s double-checking the reply - as in, “Is this really what you just told me, that you did turn off your bodycam recorder?”
The original question implies Cruiser LEO does not want what follows to be heard by anyone or recorded. But while he must have turned off his radio’s mic off not to be heard, he may have no control over his cruiser’s dashcam always recording. So we can expect the rest of Cruiser LEO’s language to be cryptic and merely suggestive, as he is being recorded but does not want to. The paradoxical assertion “Was” by Cruise LEO suggests that his phone counterpart also does not want to be recorded by his bodycam and has complied, now safe for “dirty” messages.
- 7:22:30: Cruiser LEO asks confused and probingly: “Hey, um, where, where, where were you at when … I thought you was in the bathroom! … Tom and Evenson were talking and you end up being up here!”
Four seconds of silence follow, and in between I add some interpretation and deducing.
My interpretation is that “when” followed by a self-censored pause “…” refers to the moment that Crooks would have started to shoot (or was thought by Cruiser LEO to have started to shoot).
Cruiser LEO is clearly confused, but NOT for the reason we’d expect. We’d expect his confusion to be caused by Crooks having died so close to the AGR 7 over-watch windows to which his phone counterpart must have been assigned (assuming counterpart is one of two window BC ESU//SWATs), and how could he have missed Crooks so close?
But Cruiser LEO’s confusion could not have been for this reason! Because he went on to say emphatically, I thought you was in the bathroom! rather than “I thought you was at the 2nd floor window over-watch!”, which was the official spot defined by SS for BC ESU/SWAT.
The implication is that, while AGR 7 2nd floor window was the official plan for BC ESU/SWAT, Cruiser LEO had been expecting his phone counterpart here to act per an unofficial plan, of being in the bathroom while Crooks was shooting? Or at least of conveying to others that he was in the bathroom while Crooks was shooting. This implication seems logical to me - can you think of a different implication of the above quoted words?
Cruise LEO’s surprise is confirmed by his follow-on statement, you end up being up here!" Clearly, “you end up” implies that he was not where expected by Cruiser LEO. Now, what “up here” means is unclear. Does “up here” refer to a 2nd floor? (This would disqualify the above implication I drew.) Or does “up here” refer to the northwestern portion of AGR, where the LEO’s cruiser is parked? I’m not sure. Can you come up with an interpretation for “up here” that makes sense of both (A) LEO Cruiser expected his phone counterpart to be in the bathroom, and (B) did not expect his phone counterpart to be “up here”? I’d love to read your thoughts on this interpretation.
Btw, the “bathroom” in this conversation may or may not be the same as the bloody bathroom in other conversations.
Their conversation continues, now that those 4 seconds of silence have passed:
7:22:38: Cruiser LEO exclaims, “Yeah, I thought you went to the bathroom! And you said, what did you say? ‘I’m at the AGR’”! (Overlaps with radio voice about “memorial DSP”? … irrelevant.)
Cruiser LEO seems shocked twice. First, he brings up the bathroom again, suggesting that his expectation had been a really strong one that his phone counterpart would be in the bathroom. Second, he seems shocked by how exactly this expectation was broken. He seems to be shocked that, of all places, his counterpart was (or said to someone he was) “in the AGR.” This is as in, “you were supposed to have been in the bathroom, I can’t believe what you just told me, that of all places you were (or said you were) at the AGR.”
… silence … (phone counterpart’s response is inaudible to dashcam recorder)
- 7:22:48: Cruiser LEO says, “Yup, ok, I was riding/writing it up but I was calling it out, so …”
… silence … (ditto)
- Cruiser LEO: “It’s too far away, plus I thought we had a team up there, and I wasn’t … oh well”
This is cryptic speech; recall why, because Cruiser is being recorded by dashcam but does not want to. The more cryptic a sentence, the better it hides dirt from scrutiny, and the more precious to us the decryption would be, so please bear with me.
My decryption starts with LEO’s using “but.” “But” suggests that what Cruiser LEO was in the process of writing up as the official version of events could be changed now, in principle, for the sake of their protection/convenience, but that in actuality Cruiser LEO already has called out the version of events over bodycam and radio, and since everything called out has been recorded, his writing must be consistent.
More specifically, what may have happened, I think, was a betrayal of Trump and a screw-up of the pre-planned cover-up. Cruiser LEO’s phone counterpart probably was one of the two BC ESU/SWATs assigned to 2nd floor window after 4 pm. The planned betrayal was that as Crooks started to shoot, phone counterpart/ESU was meant to be in some bathroom; Trump would die (thanks to Crooks alone or second shooter) and BC ESU/SWAT would invoke the “incompetence/bathroom” excuse for not being in the over-watch window. For this betrayal to work, it was not necessary for phone counterpart/ESU to ever be in a bathroom during shooting, it would suffice that outsiders to the plot believe that this is where he was. This belief could be implanted in police’s minds via radio channels if one person - say Cruiser LEO or accomplice - were to broadcast over radio, “ESU/SWAT just told me he went to the bathroom, please extra attention out there.” Congressional subpoenas for radio recordings would then further implant this rationale of “incompetence/bathroom” in the minds of Congress and the country.
Maybe Crooks did shoot 1-8 all himself, but here is another possibility. Counterpart/ESU would not go to the bathroom (just a ruse to be broadcast over radio to implant an innocent rationale for security failure) and be free to position himself in an assassin’s nest. He could be in the nest far earlier than the officially reported 6:06:6:12 gap in the BC ESU/SWAT post-action report, because though 2nd floor over-watch windows were open, they had a screen that prevented people outside from seeing ESU behind screens. (I forget now where I read this.) Nobody would have noticed ESU/SWAT abandoning those windows, freeing him/them to position and await in nest. Said BC ESU/SWAT traitor would deliberately shoot 1-3, a cue for patsy Crooks to shoot out his mag (except he was neutralized by shot #9).
This is a coherent story of the betrayal of Trump and fellow police. Now to a story of the failed cover-up, that is coherent with the dashcam conversation transcribed and interpreted above.
The planned cover-up was, again, to invoke “bathroom/incompetence” and uncoordinated radio comms. (Cruiser LEO would be the only contact between ESU over-watch snipers and the rest of radio listeners). The Cruiser LEO expected to implant this narrative, and did call it out over the radio. However, phone counterpart/ESU sniper screwed up and radioed out or told someone “I’m in AGR”! Recall how shocked Cruise LEO was that counterpart had not “been in the bathroom” and criticized him - “And you said, what did you say? ‘I’m at the AGR’” As in, “You idiot, what you said to others just blew up our cover story.” And now that Cruiser LEO already radioed out “ESU over-watch sniper is going to the bathroom quickly” and it’s been recorded, he cannot change it in the post-action write-up. The story that ends up in this report is in between “I ESU am at AGR” and “He ESU is not at the window because bathroom”; now it’s, “I ESU am at AGR” and “He ESU is not at the window because looking for Crooks outside/letting buddy sniper back in.”
One test of this cover-up story is whether Cruiser LEO was part of drafting the BC ESU/SWAT post-action report.
Phew! Now to the quick end of their phone conversation. (The latest was: I was writing it up but I was calling it out.)
… silence … (phone counterpart speaks but inaudible to dashcam)
- 7:22:52: Cruiser LEO says, “Oh, okay … It’s too far away, plus I thought we had a team up there, and I wasn’t … oh well.”
What’s going on? Very cryptic! Highly speculative here, I have little confidence. “Oh well” suggests another mistake was made or cannot smoothly be covered up. “I thought we had a team up there” suggests a part of the traitors did not execute from where they should have, “up there” - wherever this is. And “it’s too far away” suggests that the phone counterpart just made a suggestion for an excuse/rationale for a failure but LEO discards it as incredible due to distance. As for “and I wasn’t …” - I have no idea. Because it’s so cryptic, it suggests the truth is so dirty and traitorous. Churchill: “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies."
- Radio voice says something unintelligible and file ends.
A lot of interpretation and some “leapy” implications were involved, but the gist is to make sense of a planned betrayal and a marred cover-up. Let’s end this by memorializing a few concrete facts and noticing a few others:
Facts:
- Cruiser LEO with passengers left AGR area because of danger of bombs in AGR, as bomb squad sets up
- But once LEO dropped off passengers way northwest of AGR, an area packed with chatty LEOs, this LEO drives right back to the dangerous zone and parks in AGR lot!
- AGR lot is empty, no chatty LEOs around, there is more privacy
- Cruiser LEO does not converse over radio, but monitors it
- In AGR lot, Cruiser LEO only does two notable things: speak to a counterpart over private phone and not over radio, and see below
- First thing LEO says is, "“Hey, are you still recording on your body camera?”
- Second thing done is to double check counterpart did turn it off (“Was” - a small leap)
- LEO surprised: “I thought you was in the bathroom!”
- LEO shocked and critical: “And you said, what did you say? ‘I’m at the AGR’!”
- LEO: “I was writing it up but I was calling it out, so …”
Now, here is weird behavior by LEO that precedes the phone call:
- 7:12:18: Cruiser LEO parks in AGR lot, LEO immediately moves some plastic wrap and starts adjusting something, and as soon as done …
- 7:12:56: … steps out of cruiser and closes door. Then immediately (hence urgently) …
- 7:12:57: … places scope+flashlight rifle combo on the front hood (bottom left of dashcam) facing AGR complex. The scope looks like it’s for 100 yards max.
- … for ~45 seconds this combo is moving around a lot on hood, it has not just been rested and left there
- 7:13:42: Scope combo moves less, but still moves slightly, as if LEO were squatted and looking through scope on the hood-rest to roughly sight it in
- 7:14:33: Scope combo disappears from dashcam’s view, was on hood for almost 100 seconds
- 7:17:30: Person walks up near the cruiser’s right, Cruiser LEO from left is seen waving off and saying, “No, I’m good.”
- 7:19:59: LEO steps in cruiser, closes door
- In under 2 minutes makes above phone call
The isolated location despite bomb risk must have an appeal, what is it? The urgency of fiddling with scope is clear, but out of place and time. The rally is over, it’s Saturday night, and surely a debriefing is to follow soon after the attempted assassination. Why is adjusting a scope so urgent right now?
This is a summary of facts around which to fit a narrative. I’ve offered a narrative of a planned betrayal of Trump and security apparatus, and marred cover-up of some mistakes.
On the last facts, I offer some speculation here. Could the initial noise in the cruiser be from removing a smaller scope from a plastic bag and loosening the mounts on a long-range scope? And then outside the car installing the smaller scope and very roughly aligning it on the mount with hood as a rest? That is, is Cruise LEO swapping an assassin’s long-range scope from his rifle for a more basic scope that would hide any 100+ yard shots he may have taken today?
4 Likes
I’m sure I’m going to get eaten up for this but…with all of the other completely odd events, I hope someone will look at this as objectively as I have.
The video of Crooks running across the roof - to the left of him behind the boom - I believe is a person. No, it’s not a flag or a tree.
Using that window that leads out onto the roof would be a perfect way to gain access and I believe the way the boom of the combine was positioned it obstructed the field of vision. Purposely.
You can see from this photo there is no flag or tree behind the building.
1 Like
Thanks for the alert. I’ve heard of the blood in the bathroom, in part from two dashcams, but I have not had a chance to even think about the implications. I’ll leave it for tomorrow maybe.
The 26 min video that this comment trail is connected to.
Okay, I just remembered that I saw a neurological scientist doing research into dreams say that the heart only pumps one time (a very hard pump) after a person dies. That’s why I was so confused about it. But thank you for clearing that up for me & thank you for doing it respectfully, unlike some other responses. Like I said, I am just a simple woman, I never claimed to be an intelligent one. 
2 Likes
More footage and sound of shooting captured.