30 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Neil Kellen's avatar

No it doesn't matter to rational people. But TDS is a clever disease.

To me the obvious point is: the shrapnel theory does not jibe with the position of Trump, the position of the shooter, the trajectory of the bullet, and the surrounding potentially shrapnel producing material.

So, are they implying that there was more than one shooter?

Expand full comment
Marsha McGrath's avatar

I find it truly curious that the shooter was quickly taken down by FBI or SS after he got his shots away, not before. Looks as if they wanted him to shoot and then never be able to talk about it.

Expand full comment
Neil Kellen's avatar

That is exactly right. And I told my wife several months ago that there would be at least one attempt to assassinate Trump, that it would be an inside job, and the assassin would be quickly eliminated so he could not talk. The guy was just a patsy.

Expand full comment
Marsha McGrath's avatar

Are you now saying, “Right again!”? You are.

Expand full comment
Dena's avatar

That’s their modis operandi.

Expand full comment
Brian Lombardi's avatar

This is the conspiracy we should be talking about, not some 3 shooters nonsense.

Expand full comment
Carrie's avatar

If they let the facts come out, we would know there was more than one shooter.

Expand full comment
Doohmax's avatar

Seems to me Wray was quite chatty at the hearing and was more than eager to provide all the words necessary to implicate Crooks as the only shooter despite the “ongoing investigation”. Hmmmmm. Same guy who still has lockjaw concerning number of undercover agents at J6.

Expand full comment
Benjamin Two N's's avatar

So far the only evidence we have suggests one shooter, not two.

Expand full comment
Carrie's avatar

I'm not so sure about that. I don't trust that they will release all the evidence. The FBI said one shooter and that is the story line they are running with while there is "evidence" of 2 shooters.

Expand full comment
TW's avatar
Jul 26Edited

Just like everything lately, they don't seem to be thinking things through to their logical conclusion. You would think they would realize that this line of thought leads to more difficult questions than the 'lone-gunman-shooting-from-roof' theory. Maybe they're just trying to muddy the waters for the simple sake of obscuring everything, but it doesn't seem very smart in the long run.

Expand full comment
daverkb's avatar

Who or whatever, I think 'inconsistencies' were design built into this operations whatever it was ... whatever was intended to do ... so as to create a purposeful chaos which never can be solved. It looks that way to me.

Expand full comment
Reasonable Horses's avatar

"Muddy the waters" is their first go-to. Once we doubt "the authorities," we're one step away from doubting everything we know. We can't let that happen.

Expand full comment
Fla Mom's avatar

I don't think we've seen enough analysis with enough granularity to know exactly where each bullet went. When the assassin saw the cop who was boosted up on the roof edge, we're told he almost immediately turned and began shooting, so he wasn't taking calm, aimed shots, I assume. Perhaps some of his rounds went astray enough that one hit a metal railing or Trump's podium and did indeed send a piece of shrapnel up like that. Even so, so what? It was a nearly successful assassination attempt, with 4 people hit from 8 rounds fired (whether shrapnel or bullet), and the security was so poor that even laypeople could see how it could have been done better.

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

The "so what?" is so that they can minimize the great emotional impact of Trump taking a bullet for the American people.

This will be a never ending talking point for the hard left from here on out, with the fact checkers repeating ad nauseum "Well actually ....'

Rational thinking people may think it's a distinction without a difference, but in reality it worth tens of thousands of votes by the soccer mom left.

When this first occurred, I thought there was no way Trump wouldn't be swept back into office by the assassin's bullet.

Now?

Expand full comment
Jay Horton's avatar

Great point Fred. It's always the long game guys and they play it well.

Later Jay

Expand full comment
Benjamin Two N's's avatar

The other thing folks aren’t realizing:

The guy was probably running a 25/300 zero. At 130-175 yards the bullet goes anywhere from 4-9” high because it’s in the top of the trajectory. He was absolutely aiming center mass at trump but was just an idiot. The podium probably obscured part of his target.

Trump was saved at the last minute by turning his head. Thank God.

Expand full comment
Brian Lombardi's avatar

There is enough analysis to know a bullet hit his ear. You're falling for the shrapnel narrative this easily?

Expand full comment
Fla Mom's avatar

Oh, hush. I'm not falling for anything. I'm being a scientist - you, know, evidence 'n stuff. Did you see the part where I say it doesn't matter, anyway? And I disagree with Fred Bennett that it matters so much, because the D's are going to lie about everything anyway.

Expand full comment
TW's avatar

That's true. 'Bleach in the veins' is still running around unfettered, as well as 'fine people'. Heck, 'hands up, dont shoot' is still around :p There may be a segment of the populace that will nod emphatically at 'supersonic hummingbird', no matter how much ballistics we hand them.

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

I've seen someone claim it was glass from a teleprompter.

Expand full comment
MaryAnn's avatar

Not “shrapnel” from the podium—it would have had to make a hard right turn at eye level or jump over DJT’s head to break through the cartilage in his right ear.

Expand full comment
Fla Mom's avatar

It's amazing what shrapnel can do. A soldier died at my camp long ago, because in a live artillery fire exercise a large piece somehow jumped over the huge protective berm and hit him.

Expand full comment
Beckadee's avatar

I saw drone footage yesterday of the water tower and I don't believe Trump turning his head to the right would have made a difference. The tower is more behind the stage [not directly of course]. Also saw there was a tree that could have blocked the 2nd sniper team view of Crooks. Aren't they saying there were 2 sniper teams on those 2 buildings behind the stage? https://t.me/georgenews/8535

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/cnns-report-3-guns-fired/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=RSS

I believe the assassination attempt was the last ditch desperate effort of Jill Biden (the former mafia princess). Trump’s death would have sealed the deal for protecting Biden’s nomination. Jill rolled the dice and lost. In the interview with George Stephanopoulos, Biden said he was confident about beating Trump, because Trump was about to be challenged with something, he had not been challenged with before. So, yeah, assassins bullets are quite challenging.

I believe that other Democrat factions were aware and even hoping beyond hope for success of the operation, though not willing to take a direct part. I don’t doubt that some Trump hating Republicans were in that boat with them. There seems to have been efforts to cash in if Trump had been killed. And what was with the sudden reversal on giving Nikki Haley a speaking spot at the RNC CONVENTION? Was that just in case there would be need for an alternative candidate to be nominated? One the Never Trumper Neocons wanted desperately?

Then, when the plot failed so gloriously, the Democrats had to scramble for safety and fervently distance themselves with major efforts to get rid of the Biden Crime Family and any perceived ties.

They all know, in the words of Bob Dylan, in good time, ‘a hard rain is gonna fall.’

I still have to think they gave every opportunity to this little demonic kid and no professional killers were there. “Here’s your chance, Jill. If you can kill Trump, while we idly stand by, the White House is yours until the corpse stinks too badly to be believed. If you fail, you’re gone. We hope you succeed. But passive support is all we’re giving you.”

I believe if there had been actual professional snipers, Trump would be dead.

I believe they were that afraid the repercussions of trying to kill the King and failing. Something made them afraid.

Expand full comment
Marsha McGrath's avatar

You could be on a true path.

Expand full comment
Karen Bandy's avatar

I don’t know but isn’t shrapnel from hand grenades and land mines, not from bullets… at that range? The shrapnel would be from a casing, right?

Expand full comment
Neil Kellen's avatar

Shrapnel includes the fractured projectile pieces of anything the bullet strikes.

Expand full comment
Reasonable Horses's avatar

If that caused the ear clip, the initial point of impact shouldn't be difficult to find. Maybe they'll report damage to the chart or podium in a few years.

Expand full comment
Alan Devincentis's avatar

Thinking exactly the same thing. From his elevation, hitting the screen would have put bullets down low at the ground. But that’s too obvious.

Expand full comment