I guess I think he and his partner ran over to help and put out their badges. Then as time passed, maybe he realized he’d probably be on camera and that the video might get FOIA’d or leaked, and got nervous.
In any case, I don’t suspect Bearded Volcom Shirt Guy of doing anything bad. He just acted a tad weird. I guess I’m inclined to let him go.
Thanks again.
I agree 100% with this. Variations are inevitable. We should however attempt to recreate the whole thing with the most accurate info, especially regarding placement and dimensions of the podium, bleachers and shooters. I agree with Roger’s focus on this…
Yes, I got something similar horizontal-wise on a straight line (didn’t check vertical), and I wasn’t even using your floor plan alignment or kml. I used the same photo but with my own alignment when I was going through howdoiknow’s kml. I stopped looking at it because I wanted to compare those elevations from howdoiknow’s theory and ballistic data for 5.56 (so far, no shot#1 from that roof far away, as you and I expected).
I read from 859 that this backtrace already considers windage and elevation. Tonight I’ll be working on the windage of your theory. I couldn’t find ref 290 where you mention wind… I’ve been working with 9mph wind… what did you use? And what bullet weight?
On X these guys are being called as CERT Community Emergency Response Team, because it is mentioned on one of the bodycams. Check it on the video on the X link below… I got to this post below from the X of that investigative journalist… can’t remember the guy’s name… Webb, I think.
https://x.com/SharleeRoseR/status/1824183156272140799
Very peculiar that these so-called CERT guys have the same taste in fashion as Crooks, huh? Almost like it was a uniform…
Hmmm
A bullet does not have to “hit” to cause damage, if close.
(say 1 mm) would lacerate the skin.
At least with bigger rounds.
???
You think he was busting drugs undercover at the rally and realized whoops: blew my cover?
Doubtful. It’s just one more thing that makes you go hmmm.
Hello Roger and Everyone,
Update:
With all the respect I can muster Roger, I believe that the theory advanced has been shoe-horned into a plausible, but thinly supported theory that is NOT supported by Trump’s subjective experience with the injury, nor with the video of the incident at moment of impact. Falling back on training in clinical psychology, I’ve also noted a degree of frustration and defensiveness with those who have critiqued the theory, indicating the possibility of emotionally motivated confirmation bias.
It pains me to say this, but this is a very serious case. I’ve also noted that the photo you used in you last reply to me was NOT taken at the moment of impact, indicating you may not have taken time to study the un-doctored livestream from RSBN. Here again is the link, cued to spot where the display screens are mentioned - https://youtu.be/Rr63RgGN-Yo?t=24091 Everyone involved with this case should watch this repeatedly. As prima-facia evidence, all reconstruction and speculation should begin here. This clue is almost as much of a gift as Trump surviving the incident. Seeing a “red arrow” in a chart at that distance required retina-centered vision in BOTH eyes. Trump refers to this “right angle” near the start of the Elon Musk interview. Head angle determined the outcome, and precision is required.
During interaction with the chart posted on the screen, Trump directed attention to the “big red arrow” which is only 1/3 of the distance from the right side of the monitor. Trump swivels his head back and forth, between this chart detail, and to the right side of the audience. The degree of swivel is most accurately depicted by the brim of his hat. Watch closely His millisecond, self-reported turn “sharply to the right” occurred at the precise moment of impact.
As elegant as the current theory is, we should not be ignoring comments from the victim of the attack, nor grasping at a theory not anchored in live video analysis. The photo I posted shows the line of attack now proposed; the line being : ** Trump’s podium posture, right side of head – the 1/3 from edge showing “big red arrow” on the screen – to possible muzzle location, horizontal only** To test this hypothesis a diagram could be constructed depicting possible muzzle elevation. With no deflection the round’s end spot could also be tested, possibly found.
Roger, I am sorry about having to post this critique. There is enough skill on this board, especially yourself, to tackle all the possibilities.
-Ken
Hi sonjax6,
I am happy you liked so many of my posts.
I personally think Crooks shot 4 – 8, but probably nobody has it on video, because who would be so crazy to continue to film when the first 3 shots are fired. One thing you do see on our “joint investigation” drawing is that echoes would bounce off the flat wall behind Crooks and in the audio from the side of the building you can hear echoes from those 4 shots, whereas the first 3 shots are buffered and sound like they come out of a room?
The way we determined the source of the first shooter is purely mathematical. Assuming the first shot hit Trumps ear and then the corner of the bleachers, all we really need to do is to find out the two points in space (Trumps ear and the corner of the bleachers). With these two points we can back trace the bullet. If the back traced bullet leads back to Crooks, then hypothesis 1 which is Crooks shoots all 8 shots would be favourable.
However, if it does not lead back to Crooks then hypothesis 2 comes into play, namely that there are two shooters. The fact that according to our calculations the origine of the shooter points to the vent would also confirm the above-mentioned “non-echoes”. So, it is 2:0 for the 2 shooters hypothesis. Up to now, nobody has been able to debunk hypothesis 2 and our calculations, but who knows, maybe somebody will come up with some convincing evidence that our hypothesis 2 is wrong and we go on from there…
Together we are strong!
There are 2 videos whose resolution would have been high enough.
In the first, the cameraman films his own face 3 seconds before the first shot.
In the second video, the cameraman stops filming 8 seconds before the shot.
7:01
There is only one reason why no photo was released of Trump’s ear before it was bandaged:
Trump didn’t want it.
I assume you have a 3D model of the site, or two separate 2D models? I see a small overhead view of on the center right of one of your .jpg illustrations which shows AGR buildings 6 and 7, the left and right bleachers and the podium, but one couldn’t determine exact placement from it.
I’ve got bachelors and masters degrees in math and I’m not senile yet, so I can learn new concepts as needed. I do number crunching. I look up things on my own like “what was the speed of sound in Butler, PA on July 13”, “What’s the typical muzzle velocity of an AR-15?”, “What is the velocity of a bullet at 150 yards?” I look up altitude in google earth. I try to account for things like Trump leaning forward at the podium, when he wasn’t leaning forward in the Copenhaver video.
I make spreadsheets like this:
For Daniel 59:
Can you explain why the Secret Service would be in on this (your theory that Trump has faked it) - they have totally trashed their reputation by providing security that is slipshod by the standards of even a startup rent-a-cop agency? What did Kim Cheatle have to gain from this? She had to resign, remember?
And why would local police go along? Why is the FBI going along with the charade? They hate Trump! Why is the entire mainstream media going along, they hate him too? Why has NOT ONE major news media organization, the FBI or the White House uttered a hint that Trump may have faked this?
As for photos and better video, there were no professionals behind the stage. There may or may not be photos of Trump’s injured ear released, but it wouldn’t satisfy you, as anything of that nature objectively could be faked. Nothing will satisfy you guys.
So I’ll just repeat my question. The secret service would had to have a MAJOR part in faking Trump almost getting killed. What did they have to gain?
Hi Ken,
I maybe just found the video that could clarify this topic once and for all?
Credit to @sonjax6 for pointing out this video:
It is a back view of the shooting, and we can clearly identify his head positions by looking at the bill of his cap and the background poles and trees. Please have a look at the animated gif below with the following explanations:
Please look at the below screenshot with the 3 positions accordingly. I think I can now say for sure that the shot did not come from the woods…
Short answer:
There are at least 20,000 male psychopaths in the U.S. between the ages of 24 and 70 who have an IQ over 130.
Since the invention of photography over 150 years ago, they have been using this opportunity to blackmail each other. This is how they have managed to organize themselves.
For a long time, it was mainly gays who were blackmailed, but now it is mainly paedophiles. Someone has to do the work.
The main goal of the constant psychological warfare against society is to divide it so that no one pays attention to the organized psychopaths.
By the way, the use of magnetic resonance imaging could easily identify psychopaths.
Why has this never been proposed by a politician?
03:13
Thank you for the reply Roger,
Again, you, and anyone else interested, needs to very carefully watch the run up to the shooting on a full-size computer with high fidelity sound, and not a smartphone.
For convenience, here is the link again to the archived broadcast, starting at intro to the chart:
NOTE:
Unfortunately, I can’t say it any more plainly. The woods, and even the water tower are still in play as the sniper(s) next The RSBN video is as important as the Zapruder Fild, with bonus, high fidelity sound.
Your skills, and those of the group are remarkable. But frankly, it appears that you are ‘married’ to a specific theory, and are seeking confirmation wherever it can be found. A good defense lawyer would rule your “no woods” conclusion as inadmissible. I am making a detailed observation from the RSBN broadcast, and have no skin in the game as far as one position or another.
Bottom line … no one has found the shooter’s nest yet. I’m just trying to give the group a clue of where to look. The truth will have rock solid proof once it is discovered.
Hey, howdoiknow, here you go. Should you have encounter any doubts or mistakes, do let us know. I believe this approach to be a quick-n-dirty way to check ideas for 2nd shooter placement. It can be done with either drop or windage on the planes… Should the most unlikely fits, then the other plane can be checked, to save time, etc…For instance, if elevation doesn’t fit, no point in checking windage, and vice-versa… let alone plot a 3d parabola in CAD. What do you think of the approach so we can check theories? I’m thinking of attempting this on Roger’s windage for that vent, but I just opened up a white port wine, so…
cool!
you will be the first to know and see the results!
many thanks!
For anyone working on maps and models:
I did rough estimates right out of the gate from the top of the weird 3rd window as soon as that Stewert video was released.
Having said that, for those with detailed models: does a shot from the top of that window clear the incline and the fence and is it possible to reach Trump’s ear?
My math still says yes, but can anyone with more exact models confirm?
It’s really annoying me that people are saying it can’t, especially because I just watched Gary with PT stand off at a distance and claim it couldn’t: when you could literally see more than half of the window from where he was. If you can see it: IT CAN SEE YOU TOO! And the angle created by being at a higher elevation reveals MORE of the window, not less. This is basic geometry.
Also, per the Congressman’s comments on the windows: All they had to do was replace the window after the third day(or during the night on days 1 to 3, how convenient they sent everyone home). Nobody would know. It absolutely could have been possible to rig the window with a removable fake pane, shoot the first 3 shots, replace the pane.
Thanks for that link. It might also be SERT. I’ll check more on this.
hello BumbleBeeez,
Daniloraf just provided me with what I need to extend my kml files with ballistic trajectories that take into account wind drift and vertical drop… I will let you know shortly whether that window is possible.
I am planning to include every vent, window and door and every roof we have been discussing and relevant roof casings that face the rally area and target the different points of interest:
I think you’re right, Brian… AI just gave me this: In Pennsylvania, USA, SERT typically stands for Special Emergency Response Team. These teams are highly trained tactical units within law enforcement agencies, often specializing in handling high-risk operations such as hostage situations, armed standoffs, or counterterrorism. They’re similar to SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) teams.
It does make sense… at one point on the DJStewart video the cammo shorts guy has his fist in the air by the building corner (the tactical sign for HOLD), and is giving directions to uniform LE, even Greg Nicols seems to be on a lower hierarchy than that guy…
