FBI has at least 3 eyewitnesses who saw all muzzle flashes. Those interviews finished at about 22h, as one of them said.
So it would be nice to find the 9th-shot officer’s bodycam.
Is this true?
" Muzzle flash comes from unburned gunpowder. Normal military loads will NOT produce a daylight flash , and only a subtle one at night, I doubt much has changed in 50 years. Hollywood blanks have far too much powder in them specifically to cause a nice big visible flash. No real gun does that."
“The flash is easier to see in the dark and hard to see on a sunny day.”
" Muzzle flashes are caused by superheated gases that exit a firearm’s barrel ahead of a projectile. The gases radiate energy into the surrounding area, including visible light, and can create a bright flash. However, the heat from the flash dissipates quickly, so it’s usually not very noticeable."
Oh, but they saw 8 of 8? 100% rate x 3, holy gee oh golly. Amazing. All 3 witnesses, huh?
Were they blanks?
did you listen to any of the interviews Gary Melton from Paramount Tactical did with various eye witnesses?
he asked them whether they saw any muzzle flash and you will be surprised to hear what they answered…
If someone claims they saw not just muzzle flashes, but all 8 flashes, then I’m going to wonder a few things:
How did they see muzzle flashes in broad daylight?
Are the witnesses lying? Are they planted eyewitnesses?
Did Crooks use blanks?
I cannot check what the witness said. But he mentioned that the other guy had filmed the shooting. So far I was able to see only one handcuff.
Possible.
Also the unnamed 9th-shot ESU officer claims he saw the muzzle flashes.
Hello greg_n & daniloraf
For the precise location of Trump’s microphone, I have the following:
40.85702 N, 79.97102 W
40°51’25.27"N, 79°58’15.67"W
For the Upper level of the press riser - the precise centre of the white blob you have marked - I have the following:
40.85711N, 79.97141 W
40°51’25.60"N, 79°58’17.08"W
Do you believe these co-ordinates are accurate?
Agree.
I don’t have any confidence there is any investigation going on besides ours. The FBI has explicitly stated that they will not investigate the USSS or local LEO. I’ve heard that the PSP is doing an investigation, but I’ve never heard anything about it. If they’re doing an investigation, they’ve been outdone by a bunch of randos on the internet.
That is beyond bizarre. Why wouldn’t they investigate the local LEO or SS, especially since there were clear gaps that seem to possibly be criminal???
This makes no sense.
Really, the FBI isn’t bothered that two locals assigned to that area, didn’t act from their assigned positions??
The FBI isn’t bothered with the accurate details for the first serious assassination attempt in 40 years??
What in the hell is wrong with the FBI?? Political capture??
Oh, do they just not do their jobs any more??
It was in the FBI’s most recent fake update.
It is not the FBI’s role to investigate the actions, the security posture, or the responsibilities of the Secret Service or local law enforcement related to the campaign rally.
As far as I can tell, they’re simply totally corrupt. It’s a rogue agency.
Usually people can’t tell whether the FBI is incompetent/corrupt, or if the case is really just very hard to investigate. In this situation, we had a race between the FBI and a bunch of internet randos as to who could find out what happened first, and the race was won handily by the internet randos.
I mean, they can say that, but IF, if there’s any question as to whether there was inside involvement for the attempt or involvement on a criminal level: do they honestly not think it is their responsibility to investigate that?
Surely they could not be so dumb as to make that statement unequivocally.
It was my understanding that the FBI can and has and does investigate corruption and criminal activities in other agencies as needed.
Where do they get off even making an outrageous statement like that to begin with? They should be reprimanded.
It is LITERALLY their job and the formal title of their agency. They have a duty to investigate even IF it involves actions of another agency.
IMO, Everyone involved has gone into full CYA mode.
I provided the Google Earth drawing in my post showing the distance.
Here it is again:
https://earth.google.com/earth/d/1KMtd5W7xev6ofeJuq00lyajpegCg7f-0?usp=sharing
Thank you, @khunter. Yes, I would say your numbers are fairly accurate. As I’m sure you know, estimating these positions is not easy, and we see some variation from one person’s approach to another. Another investigator, @vt1 , also kindly provided these points, and I was curious how close your locations would be. Comparing your numbers with @vt1’s:
Your podium mic is 3.3 ft to the West
Your NTD location is 8.5 ft to the Northeast
Given all of the variables involved, I’d say that pretty good agreement.
it is impossible to know whether these positions are accurate or not:
last week, I had a chat with a geodesist and asked him the coordinates his system reported for the location where I encountered him.
(I noticed they were indexing/updating their maps in a street where I drove around).
we compared
and all of these values were different beyond rounding errors…
also the elevation values were seriously off.
it turns out the geodesists
it also turns out that they stopped referring to sea levels due to definition issues, which is why they migrated to using well identified and fully specified landmarks
so, as long as it is clear which coordinate system is used, coordinates can be compared within that system, but coordinates from a GPS reader cannot be compared to coordinates of google earth or a geodesist and vice versa…
also note that a vehicle uses a concept know as “snap to road” to adjust its reference point derived from the GPS signals it receives: a car is supposed to be driving along and near roads, so it keeps state and when the car shuts down, the GPS receiver stores its last known road location and uses that location as a starting point for further navigation.
as soon as the car starts driving around again, it starts analysing the GPS signals and triangulates its location.
meanwhile, it maps its movements to the digitized map and sees whether it still matches a road.
when the car turns left/right, it checks whether the system still uses the right offsets, and corrects whenever necessary by “snapping to the nearest road” parallel to its driving direction, and it keeps checking and correcting its readings to its digitized map…
the GPS system of a car that gets transported by train, boat or truck or similar take much longer to find their new first location than cars that drove to that location…
I use in my kmls the default maps of google earth pro, i.e., 1985…
Hello HowdoIKnow
From what I understand of your research up to this point, I thought that you favoured a second shooter on the tall AGR building behind Crooks. And I thought you were trying to back trace the bullet’s path - both as a straight line ideal and also a curved trajectory - to see if it corresponded to the high building in question.
Based upon what you have just said, are you now saying that you have abandoned all attempts to back trace the bullets, because you think that it is impossible to determine with any confidence the origin point of any shooter in terms of elevation and position? Essentially, that the margins of error are too great to achieve this?
Or the video stream of that dashcam was edited too.
hello KHunter,
no, the scenario I go for is still based on the high roof behind crooks, which is the highest building at the AGR parking:
from my point of view, the shooter from this location was a professional sniper who fired the first 3 rounds towards Trump.
originally, I assumed that this shooter would also have fired the subsequent 5 rapid-fire shots, but since the bodycam footage has been released that shows the SWAT officer firing the 9th bullet at crooks, I am no longer convinced that the high roof shooter fired the the subsequent 5 rounds too.
so, this is the situation how I see it now:
there are a couple of degrees of freedom in this scenario based on the many remarkable observations:
I also believe that the snipers on the barns behind Trump returned fire very quickly after the first shots were fired, but as they did not have a direct line of sight, their bullets must have pruned the trees (cfr. the red circle in the image above).
so, this is my view on this matter…
meanwhile, I have been programming a ballistic trajectories calculator based on an open source library (GNU Ballistics Library download | SourceForge.net), and I am now integrating these trajectories in the kml files I released about a month ago.
this integration of ballistic trajectories took a little longer than expected as a consequence of the remarkable unforgiving nature of this forum:
and countering these messages consumes much precious time, but if that time is not invested in neutralizing critiques, they assume silence equals approval, and that has to be avoided…
sometimes I get the impression that they launch a coordinated distributed denial of service attack on people’s resources in the hope that they will surrender and give up, but (as you may have noticed by now) that is not my nature: I’d rather die than surrender.
all this introduced some delays in releasing a new version of my kml files that reflect how I see the scenario described above with the ballistic trajectories…
about terminology: I am not in favour of using the terms “second shooter”, because from my initial point of view, there was only 1 shooter.
with my current view, there may be 2 shooters, but the main shooter is certainly not the “2nd” shooter…
about your question wrt the back tracing of bullets: back tracing bullets is sheer nonsense for the simple reason that there are so many unknowns: the exact position of the podium, the position of Trump, the position of the bleachers and the JCB hydraulic lift, the location where the first bullet interacted with the bleachers, the elevation of the different points of interest and actors, etc, etc.
in the past month, the exact location of that interaction with these bleachers has shifted with about 2 ft, the elevation and height of the podium, Trump himself and even his ear have changed by several inches, and no matter which heights or distances or positions change, the back tracing snake oil salesman always comes back with the same “back traced shooting position”…
really: back tracing bullets with these parameters is sheer nonsense.
so, my approach to find out what is plausible or not is very simple: I now have the ballistic trajectories, and can plot the bullet’s path from whatever potential shooter’s position and see where the bullet arrives, taking into account various wind speeds, bullet weights, ballistic coefficients, etc, etc.
I am now adding the average speed for each of the trajectory points such that the audio analysts can easily calculate their snik-boom or something like that…
the margins of error are very small as far as I am concerned when using a sensible approach that minimizes the number of assumptions and degrees of freedom…
with my approach, you simply take a position from which you want the ballistic trajectory to start from (can be any position on any roof, vent, window, door, tree, etc) and where it should pass by/through, and then you see where the bullet passes on its way from the shooter to the indicated target, and if that makes sense, we are happy, if that trajectory does not make sense, you use different parameters (caliber, wind speed, muzzle velocity, etc)
