Ok, I was wrong.
But still, Someon has switched to another radio channel.
(I try to pick that cherry.)
1 Like
Nicol also abandoned his post without permission when he could reasonably have radioed to others for assistance.
2 Likes
Still I think the bike owner was detained. The question is: when?
1 Like
Is that something that could be FOIA’d? I mean whether or not the bodycam recording was redacted? And if it was, wouldn’t that be a kind of smoking gun?
1 Like
This guy was also detained and seems to be in handcuffs, but I’m not sure exactly when this occurred.
2 Likes
They said a bloody bill was found in his pocket. And I immediately asked if it was paid by cash or card. Since there was no ID card with him, but credit cards have name on it. (Except the no name cards the NGOs gave the immigrants allegedly.)
And they showed a copy of his former ammo purchase, which was not bloody. And the same question is applicable too.
2 Likes
That was this guy getting detained the USSS (Kuss said “We have 2 officers”) inside the perimeter. I don’t recall the time.
He and his girlfriend Mia Kopps, who took the video, and also the video linked below, were interviewed. there is a link to that interview somewhere above in this thread. The footage linked below is after the shooting, so after he was detained.
Edit: He was detained after the interaction with the USSS seen in this video, per his interview testimony below, so after the shooting.
3 Likes
Testimony says thre were two or three incidents around that time.
Well, I would ask if only that time. So, how many detainments were in total?
Here you go, Mia Kopps and Eric Defelice interview.
Edit: As he stated in his interview he was detained during the site evacuation following the shooting.
1 Like
Bike owner interview after the rally.
2 Likes
Good point (but bloody receipt, not bill). And no store surveillance footage either from the ammo store or the Home Depot where he allegedly bought a ladder.
2 Likes
The Allegheny County bomb squad detained him. They went to the bike after the shooting, after the bomb squad tech was on the roof, and that’s likely when they detained him, likely at the request of the ATF or other 3-letter agency…
1 Like
Yes, I remember now this interview. Bud he didn’t say when he was detained. He did say he was kept for a couple of hours.
1 Like
Clearly if he was detained by the bomb squad it was after the shooting. He probably saw the bomb squad at his bike and walked over there. Local police were over there checking out and maintaining a perimeter at his bike, before the bomb squad showed up, but that was after the Door 13 event, too.
2 Likes
I’m not sure who you are referring to switching radios channels, but they (USSS) did switch channels during the rally that the “post standers” were using, not the counter snipers, due to getting bleed over from the First Lady’s event. That was in the Lead Advance Agents testimony.
1 Like
Thanks for the heads up. That link on my Research Tools and on the radio communications tool both work.
BTW, I just discovered that I had a missing page of radio comms in the tool, the 18:22:17 to 18:24:09 time range. I’ve updated my slide deck. Here it is in case that’s what you’re using for your project.
Timeline of Radio Communications (Rev 7).pdf (7.4 MB)
Now I have to go back and revise my ESU Armor & Response Analysis. There is a lot of information about the Terradyne in this segment that I missed.
2 Likes
I’d prefer to hear you say “It would be nice to have some more evidence one way or another.” It sounds like you are only looking for “evidence” in one direction.
Remember, even if (as seems likely) that particular ladder picture is a dead end, it does nothing to debunk a tree shooter hypothesis. Assuming the Hercules 2 team is not lying or totally clueless, we either have Crooks shooting at least two shots between the team with no view of them, or else shots were fired from elsewhere.
I say at least two, but it sounds like he’s talking about three cracks on pages 14 and 15 of the transcript.
I don’t think anyone has talked about this yet. Do you think the Hercules 2 counter sniper heard the report from the rifle muzzle at all? It sounds like he’s contradicting himself here: (pages 56- 57 of the transcript)
Also, he must have heard the shots that Mr. Trump’s microphone picked up, wouldn’t you think (in addition to those that went between him and his partner)? It seems like the committee kept dancing away from following up on important points.
25 I wasn’t even sure if it was the AGR building itself. It
1 could’ve been beyond it, because I didn’t hear a report
2 from a weapon . It sounded honestly like it was suppressed,
3 like it had a suppressor on it, because it didn ’ t – it
4 wasn ’ t like a loud boom that you would expect, being in a -
5 - 200 yards away. It was muffled .
2 Likes
I will say what I say, thank you very much…I say what I mean and mean what I say. If you read what I said, “It would likely put a nice bow on my debunking of it’s alleged use for pulling a sniper kit out of that tree,” you’ll see that I clearly referenced the activity the screenshot was said to be showing by the person who sent it to Brenden Dilley, “pulling a sniper kit out of that tree.” [Emphasis Added] I said nothing about a potential sniper in another tree, even though I still don’t see any “valid” evidence for that theory. The only thing wrong with what I said, as I reread it, is that I used “it’s” instead of the possessive “its.”
If you read my recent analysis of it, you’ll see that I use the phrase “Barking up the wrong tree.” [Emphasis Added]
If you didn’t read it, here it is if you’re interested. In it you will find a link to The Dilley Show where he presented that screenshot and described what his source said about it.
Theories Debunked - Cullen’s Tree (Rev 1).pdf (1.6 MB)
That is what I was debunking, like I said and like I meant, not the whole tree shooter hypothesis as you apparently incorrectly assumed.
3 Likes
I know you are only debunking that photo and that tree. It just seems you are putting a lot of effort into and seeming very jubilant over a very trivial thing.
It’s a type of straw man argument. Why would you go to all this trouble, when any reasonable person would say, “Big deal, so they weren’t looking up THAT tree”? I can only guess you are hoping some people won’t stop to think that.