Just saw Chris’ video today. Crooks may have taken something for anxiety before going up. A beta blocker is very common for this. If he was coached then they would probably have given him something. It would need blood tests. Even if he was acting alone, anti-anxiety information is common online so he could have learned it from there. You can’t assume that he would be jittery.
Continuing the discussion from Other Forensics of the Assassination Attempt:
Description
It seems like the blood trailing on his face is coming from a wound directly below his ear on his neck. And you can see that his neck is clearly injured in that picture and the way the blood is and how thick that trail is he was definitely shot from the back
This was an active situation. Threat(s) were NOT confirmed neutralized. Trump was NOT secured. He was still on the premises and not secure.
Giffords org is well known for NOT posting the complete laws, and even making up their version of the law. I give them ZERO credibility for well know errors.
I agree and have pointed it out to Chris.
If you review the whole video, you will see that the looks of that window changes. Take a look at the window at the time the woman on the horse passes by. It seems to have some window covering.
@chrism You might want to think about beefing up your security. From here on out I would think its best to assume someone is following you, listening in on your calls and internet communication and probably even have bugs in your home and office.
Just saying. I am sure you already on top of that.
3 Likes
First, thank you for that. Second, I didn’t intend to come back today, but decided one more look to resolve things in my head and reach out more to my Congressman, who I appreciate a lot and is on one of the Committees. Third, the more I dig the more I find and what you said squares and makes sense though I haven’t seen what you shared. Again, thanks. Third, I noticed her ring and guessed she was next to her husband in Red and feel empathy and compassion for her. Fourth though in that same vein, we are up against a Machine that doesn’t abide by the rules and we keep leaving our gloves on, when they are using brass knuckles. Typical Marxists that also adhere to The end justifies the means as espoused by Niccolò Machiavelli. Fifth, well past the hyperbole of the Left and that we and Trump will end democracy, as with each passing day I no longer recognize the America l knew.
We need to fight harder and smarter, before our options run out like so many ways the Demonrats are in. When Kamala is the Best you got, 7/13s will happen so The Deep state can cling onto power and control.
So I feel very badly for her, but if we don’t turn things around soon the loss of democracy may not be the worse of our problems. But at least, a clear message went out that we are doing more than just watching.
Though I know this is hyperbole, just image if Biden could actually fill a backstage and a 7/13 happened to him. Everyone around him would be in jail, as the wannabe Dictator eventually sorted out the Crowd.
We have to play tougher and smarter. Take Wray for example. He pushed back his testimony before the American people for as long as he could. Gamed out as many scenarios as they could and were well prepared for questions like the one Congressman Bishop asked. Wray easily knew the question about Crooks and how many shots he took and similar such questions were coming.
Congress needs to know that Wray doesn’t want to answer questions Americans deserve to know, he won’t be transparent and he wants to be/look like the Smartest man in the room. We have to knock him off his game. And that the FBI has been found directly involved and complicit against takedown schemes against President Trump. And hold them to it. They don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt and every investigation must reflect that outrage and our comtempt for the FBI Gestapo.
My jaw would have hit the floor, if Congressman Bishop would have fired back with "Yes, we know Crook’s magazine held over 8 cartridges and that you recovered. Now answer the question, "how many actual spent casings “from that day” were from Crook’s DPS? Was the Crime scene preserved according to strict protocols immediately after Crooks was neutralized? When are we going to see the fingerprint analysis from those casings?
And if not, specifically why not? Who is being held responsible?
Don’t back down or let him off the hook. Make him look stupid and feel Stupid, he doesn’t deserve better.
We need to play smarter and tougher. And everyone in LE, SS, State Police and the FBI (at a minimum) especially needs to feel the pressure and understand that they are under the microscope especially when they ignore long established standards and protocols.
Thank you again fellow Patriot.
3 Likes
Dr. Martenson,
I recently watched your video regarding the Stewart video. Like you, I want to follow the evidence where it leads. Please allow me to submit an explanation for question, as I would very much like it to be evaluated.
Could the difference in tone from low to high frequency be explained by the Doppler effect? In that I mean:
First, in the Stewart film (Position #6) shots 1-3 the gun muzzle is pointed in the direction of the cellphone (south), and the bullet is moving towards the microphone (and in general direction of the Trump stage) resulting in a high pitch. Shots 4-8 have a lower frequency and could be moving in a direction away from the microphone (north).
Conversely, in the video from Position #4 shots 1-3 with the gun muzzle pointed towards Trump (south) are now moving away from the microphone, resulting in a low pitch. Shots 4-8 have a higher pitch because those shots were pointed more in that general direction.
If true, this could indicate that Crooks took the first 3 shots at Trump, and then (as was reported) as he was spotted from the open window, turned around (to the north) to return fire to the open window before being shot by the sniper on Building #14?
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and for your in-depth analysis. We all know we would never get this level of effort and transparency from the government. And thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Jesse Olson
1 Like
Glad we are still in a Country, where we are free to disagree. And one of the things I haven’t done is being a SS detail though have been a part of armed Military Security and even Interdiction teams.
And according to those i have interacted with here, the “bomb proof” SUV is secure.
And if you listened to SS agents, they repeatedly say something to the effect that the shooter (threat) is down and now let’s move the Principle.
Though I agree with you that the threat wasn’t resolved.
And the Fact that at least someone or somehow President Trump had at least one loaded rifle pointed at him from around 150 yards with shots fired, which is essentially point blank to me. I cant see how that is possible without some LE help/coordination.
That is already a failure to SS suggesting protocols have already been breached.
And at the specific moment, we are talking about SS knew with maybe others, the Principle was leaving in a matter of seconds.
Listening to the varkous Counter Sniper teams on the grounds that day, SS didn’t coordinate with them much less established communications with them.
Regardless, SS had the Principle in the SUV and were in mere seconds ready to leave , when another loaded rifle is shouldered if not at the SUV damn close. It was deliberate as he moved within a few feet of the SUV, weapon shouldered.
In the best light, what threat was he addressing? Dirt? Air?
The only other humans in close proximity were SS agents in suits moving forward and in seconds moving forward with the SUV.
The only threat I saw was a man in front of the SUV with a shouldered semi auto rifle that could have been directed at the President.
And there is plenty of discussion of discussion of which rounds at which range can penetrate that SUV from windshields to the sides.
And I don’t know if confirmed, but I hear that Crooks had FMJs. If true, bizarre.
I also know that it takes me mere fractions of a second mount my gun. Been timed plenty.
I know the Guy is getting a pass, but I could also see him identified as a threat.
That’s my thoughts on that and those won’t change. Instead of closing on the SUV, he could have/should have moved more laterally without a shouldered gun.
And I see it like Rules of the Road on the Water, when approaching another boat in a heads on direction. If you decide to make a change of course, it should be decisive and beyond obvious to avoid confusion.
What advantage do you gain with a rifle by moving forward a few yards instead of staying fixed?
Learning to control your firearm especially the barrel is one of the first thing I learned as a kid and I wouldn’t even try to estimate the number of shooters that I have been around overs the years. I have never had a barrel pointed close in my direction especially shouldered or within a few feet.
And careless looking at this from a LE perspective even, because where you are pointing your gun is a universal choice.
And sorry not sorry about firearm safety especially President Trump mere moments after an assassination attempt.
I noticed that too.
I watched the whole video several times, focused on that window.
The look of the window changes during the video.
Take a look how the window looks when the lady on the horse passes by.
The window is just to the right of the horses head.
This look can be seen from the start of the video.
Shortly before the shot is fired from that window, the look has changed.
So who was in that room, fired the shot and for what purpose
1 Like
And I apologize this time because this still pi$$es me off.
Because the only “threat” that he was addressing was Trump supporters that had been SHOT. RIDICULOUS…
Just as ridiculous as claiming their could have been a shooter in the Stand that took fire that he watched and waited as President Trump was moved slowly past him and did Nothing.
But now that Trump was in the SUV, which was leaving, the shooter sprung into action and assaulted the SUV.
Getting a uniform isn’t tough. Or buying someone off, coercing them, groomimg them, it happens a whole lot more than what the Operator did that you are giving a pass on.
Or that everyone on that task force to protect the President knows each other.
That is much more understandable than some 20 year old kid climbing a building near the President and shooting him.
Next time, he starts shooting…What…Ooopsss
Just fortunate he didn’t start shooting…
I’m out…
mostly reflections and unstable camera playing with our heads. nothing much of importance there. If i was a sniper who want to remain undetected, those windows would be my last choice. Even staying on top of a tree for a few hours would have been anytime better at remaining hidden.
one shooter was on the 2nd floor window or on another or same rooftop. And I bet he was on uniform.
Thank you. After looking more closely it appears giffords.org has an anti-gun bias. They feature lots of information on why minors should not have access to guns … citing suicide ideation … etc
Normally, I search using a general expression in the search term ie ‘site:pa*.gov’ for laws … and believe a better url for information follows:
For reference: ICYMI: Grassley Oversight Unveils ‘Most Detailed Picture Yet’ of Trump Assassination Attempt
The document I found the most disturbing is the PDF called “FPOTUS After Action Beaver County ESU/SWAT”, filename beaver_county_fpotus_after_action_redacted.pdf.
On page 6, there’s a timeline. At 18:12, shots are fired. At 18:23, they scale the roof. That’s a huge gap.
But worse is that at 18:06, one of the snipers goes downstairs to meet someone, apparently to tell him something, as if we don’t have radios or phones. He leaves his post to do this, despite Trump having just taken the stage. Crooks apparently chooses exactly this time to start crawling across the roof.
This is simply too suspicious, too coincidental. It’s like Clark Kent stepping away to go to the bathroom and that’s when Superman shows up.
The two snipers in the building behind Crooks should be in small rooms being asked a lot of questions by homicide detectives.
1 Like
Agreed. We do that by focusing on actual valid fact-based assertions and swiftly omitting time-wasting red-herrings that are not based in fact or easily debunked.
Like this: You’ve repeatedly alleged the brunette in the stands is FBI. No facts to support it, and it’s been debunked.
Like this:
I’ve some experience here but I’ll defer to professionals who seem to disagree sufficiently where the SS agents conduct is acceptable and comptent. Some professionals have stated to move the principal immediately off the danger “X” while some have said that shielding him until the threat is over, then moving him is appropriate or acceptable. I think the SS detail overall did fine, moving him after radio report of the threat being killed, then shielding him and putting him in a armored vehicle within moments.
This assertion, that a rifle was pointed at Trump in a threatening manner by SS/LEO, continues to be a dishonest or uniformed assertion because it simply did not occur. As I’ve proven by photos and links to videos, no SS agent pointed a gun at Trump or anywhere near him during the evacuation phase. We don’t know what the agent/LEO in question pointed at was nowhere near the vehicle but easily 30 degrees or more away from the vehicle, and we don’t know what it was he pointed at so it’s pure speculation but we can easily tell it was not even at Trump or the vehicle (I would speculate he is clearing the lane for the vehicle to egress, or cautioning onlookers to stay back, but it’s speculation. What is NOT speculation is he did NOT point the rifle at the vehicle and even if he had it is totally immune to 5.56mm so would have been a futile gesture at best). I question your continued assertion of this clearly false fact. When people persist on obviously false narratives, they have a motive. What is your motive here?
On this we agree, and it is a level of numerous examples of extreme incompetence that demonstrates complicity and coordination.
It is certainly a “yellow” category unknown worthy of pursuing. Let’s analyze.
In favor of a shot coming from this ground floor window:
A) Two unexplained white light flashes - but these are not synched to any gunshots.
B) Same general trajectory as Crooks if he was a patsy.
C) Fast/easy escape round on ground floor, just pack up and walk away.
D) The window does indeed change a bit but is that sufficient to explain this? I don’t know.
Evidence against a ground floor shot:
A) We have several good before, during, and after camera images of these windows. None of the windows ever appeared open, and none appear damaged.
B) Low ground would be an illogical vantage for a sniper because it is easier to be seen, stopped/shot by officers, recorded, and offers a poor vantage to the target (shooting thru fences, crowds, etc.)
C) After the shooting at least two LEOs walk by the ground floor windows and look at them, clearly demonstrating there was no damage to the closed glass windows.
I don’t see how anyone could have opened the windows, taken shots, and closed the windows without it being observed or recorded. That person would also have had to gather his brass, and escape in a small window with all LEOs standing around.
I don’t know what these light flashes were, however. Possibly a camera flash or flashlight emanating from inside the building? Possibly a camera flash from outside the building reflecting on the glass window? I don’t know and it does need to be analyzed more.
QUESTION from the video, “Stewart film blows the official narrative out of the water”
QUESTION: Is that the sound of glass breakage in this new audio !? In one of the previous audio analysis we heard that the first 3 shots were a bit muffled while shots 4-8 were much louder. If that’s glass breaking / window pane shattering in this new audio of 1-3, then did a shooter fire 1-3 shots through one of the windows (causing the first 3 to sound muffled) and then the next 5 louder because there’s no more window glass? Were any of those windows under Crooks on the ground floor broken or shot out? Is there any broken glass on the ground or a newly replaced window (if we were to go visit now and take a look)? I know you said the windows all appear to be closed, but what’s the odds of the real shooter being below crooks and shooting through the window and breaking glass ?? Additionally (and to confirm crooks didn’t fire the 1st three shots – There is a spectator video filming crooks as the first shot is heard and no rifle recoil or movement from Crooks’ shoulder indicating he didn’t fire the first 1-3 bullets.
Another thing to mention here is that the bullet trajectory doesn’t seem to match a shooter from one of the 2nd floor windows. If the shooter was inside a building, he would have needed to be more to the east for the geometry of the shots to match who was hit in the bleachers. I know it’s hard to tell, but my guess is that all 8 shots (or at least the first 3 came from inside the building on ground floor level – and now it sounds as if the first 3 shots broke the glass allowing shots 4-8 to be louder. Or maybe Crooks did fire those last 5 shots (don’t know). We really need an honest and open forensics on all 8 bullet casings recovered (which isn’t going to happen).
I don’t see “a sizeable hole on his left eyelid/brow”, but I do see what appears to be a hole above his left upper lip and most of his front teeth missing on the left side of his mouth…. Was he shot there above the left side of his mouth, shot twice, or in both places ?
Or did the shockwave from the bullet impact knock the teeth out on the left side of his mouth? Everyone keeps talking about Crooks being shot above the left eye, but I don’t see it. I see what appears to be a hole above his mouth on the left side
I disagree. I believe the bullet entered just above the left side of his upper lip, knocked out several front teeth and then exited the back of the neck under the right ear. Take a serious hard look just above the left side of his mouth. That appears to be the bullet entry. Most people state the bullet hit him above the left eye, but I don’t see that. I see the entry hole above his mouth.
1 Like
Let’s grant either possibility and say Crooks got shot on the left side of his face. How? It seems like the prevailing hypothesis is that he got shot by the sniper group on the barn that wasn’t occluded by the tree. But wouldn’t they have hit Crooks on his right side?
One thing I want to point out is that we only have to do crazy amounts of speculation because we still have no official word on where on his body Crooks was hit, who shot him, what kind of round he was hit with, etc. I consider this to be a roundabout admission of guilt by the authorities. I think they’re terrified to say anything because it’s likely to be demonstrated to be a lie within days if not hours.
1 Like