*** Trump Shot (but safe) *** Live Now on all News Channels

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Nasu (here)
I tend to agree with the video maker that we will not get to the bottom of this, being that the FBI is the one doing this analysis, akin to the fox doing the investigation of the deaths of the chickens in the hen house......x...... N

Yup - that'd definitely a problem.

It's often a problem with high profile "lone shooter", mass shooting and major "terrorist" events.

If we do get to the bottom of this, it will be the analysis of more controversial, less visible, analysts, buried by similar "fog of war" gas lighting narratives intended to discredit and confuse such analysis.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by SilentFeathers (here)
As for why they didn't see Crooks from the window? Perhaps they were back away from the window behind their rifles and couldn't see down that roof that far to notice Crooks. Who knows?

They just cannot come out with this as a reason (excuse) for how Crooks got missed. He was identified as a suspicious person long before he climbed on the roof. He was even photographed from a second floor window at the far end of that building >>



From this point on, multiple pairs of eyes would have tracked his every movement, right up to when local law enforcement spotted him themselves. An officer climbed up on the roof to investigate, and confirmed with his own eyes that Crooks had a gun. And yet Trump was allowed to continue with his speech as if there was no threat at all.

[ThePythonicCow]

The local and county security, swat, and sniper teams had NO contact with and NO way to contact Trump's Secret Service detail until after the assassination attempt.

The Secret Service sniper teams were only authorized to handle security for that rally the day before and had NO chance to do their security advance a week or two before the rally. This was for an outdoor site, with multiple line of sight issues everywhere, thousands of people, ... for your highest security profile risk protectee.

The chaos of multiple local, county and state swat, police and sniper teams assigned the security around the AGR buildings, water tower, without prior planning, without coordination with the Secret Service, and without ANY communications with the Secret Service until after the shooting "sounds and more sinister by the day", to quote Dan Bongino (at the 14:10 mark, in the following video).

The Secret Service Scandal Keeps Getting Uglier (Ep. 2296)

Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v56kwzh

[SilentFeathers]

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)

Posted by SilentFeathers (here)
As for why they didn't see Crooks from the window? Perhaps they were back away from the window behind their rifles and couldn't see down that roof that far to notice Crooks. Who knows?

They just cannot come out with this as a reason (excuse) for how Crooks got missed. He was identified as a suspicious person long before he climbed on the roof. He was even photographed from a second floor window at the far end of that building >>

Attachment 53474

From this point on, multiple pairs of eyes would have tracked his every movement, right up to when local law enforcement spotted him themselves. An officer climbed up on the roof to investigate, and confirmed with his own eyes that Crooks had a gun. And yet Trump was allowed to continue with his speech as if there was no threat at all.

What blows my mind even more is that the Stewart Film shows several cops walking around that building trying to see up on it for a good 60 seconds or more before the first shot was fired. One with his gun drawn so there WAS an obvious threat. At that point they didn't even need to radio Trumps personal detail, they could of just simply started to yell and scream in that direction for Trump to get down. They were only about 100 yards away!!!!

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
By the way, I'd still wager, as would Jason Goodman and John Cullen, that it was actually Maxwell Yearick whose corpse we see on the AGR roof, not Thomas Matthew Crooks.

If any limited hangout is in play, it's Yearick. He probably has nothing to do with this anyway. But one thing is for certain, one hundred percent certain, and that's the body on the roof is Crooks.

Yearick's ear (seen in this post) is a million miles from Crooks's. Comparing the corpse image with Crooks from the Blackrock commercial, we see the ear is identical.



The weird little double ridge feature is also present on the corpse.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)
If any limited hangout is in play, it's Yearick. He probably has nothing to do with this anyway. But one thing is for certain, one hundred percent certain, and that's the body on the roof is Crooks.

Yearick's ear ...

May I suggest a correction?

One thing is for certain ... that's Crook's ear (the upper half at least) on that body on the roof.

"They" know we look at ears. We do NOT know if "they" photoshop'd that image before "leaking" it.

See further my comments in Post #1007, earlier in this thread.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
"They" know we look at ears. We do NOT know if "they" photoshop'd that image before "leaking" it.

It's true you can create some stunningly convincing fakes with apps like photoshop. Imaging tools are extremely sophisticated these days. But it's almost impossible to do without leaving digital fingerprints (analysis tools are equally as powerful).

So they'd be fools to try. And why do so anyway? Why try to convince us the body doesn't belong to that lone-wolf bum with a mental health disorder but this lone-wolf bum with a mental health disorder?

It's Crooks. Watch the bodycam footage again. In several frames Crooks' body can be seen without the blur mask. At 6:55 for instance.



Granted, the quality is low due to compression, but that's the same protruding ear shape. This frame matches the photograph we have of the corpse.

I'd humbly suggest that Yearick is a distraction. Not an atom of evidence points to him being involved.

[mountain_jim]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)

Posted by Tintin (here)
From my perspective it's not so much not paying attention to it, for me Martenson is taking a rock-solidly sensible largely grounded approach, and is data gathering, in the main, and drawing some sensible conclusions based on that, and I like the way he does that.

Martenson is doing sensible analysis, yes ... of the evidence he considers.

He refuses, despite a variety of us trying to encourage him to consider, some of the other evidence.

Last week, Cullen's presented some quite compelling evidence of at least one shot coming from the water tower or trees close thereto. This was a shot that is visually evident, but not audibly evident.

He continues to present further compelling evidence of other shots, and also quite careful calculations of the shot timings that differ critically from the calculations of Martenson and Mike Adams.

If you don't consider what Cullens is finding, you won't yet know if he is finding evidence that Martenson and Adams haven't considered.

I agree with you here.

I think Martenson has responded to Cullens dismissively, twice (that I know of) saying folks' reflex reactions to shots being fired can not be considered evidence. But Cullens earlier video analysis shows more than that, with clothing moved, etc.

(now I will watch latest (free portion) Cullen video you posted)

[mountain_jim]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
From the latest Patreon post Patrons Only: Breaking the Case Wide Open, Again.. (minimum cost $5/month) of Jason Goodman and John Cullen:

Cullen documents several silenced and subsonic gun shots, happening while Trump is still speaking, just before the famous, loud, shot that nicked Trump's ear. Silenced, subsonic, gun fire has neither the loud (supersonic) crack nor the loud (not silenced) report of the gun firing, but its report might still show up on audio recordings.

Cullen presents a scenario such as the following possible one, that would be consistent with these shots and what else he has observed so far:

The Secret Service sniper teams on the both roofs were taking silenced, subsonic gunfire while Trump was still speaking. The covert sniper's apparent plan would have been to disable these snipers first, and then tell Crooks to start shooting with his AR-15 second. Crooks' shots would be the first shots noticed by Trump or his close at hand Secret Service agents. Crooks perhaps was assured he would be safe from the Secret Service snipers, because they would be disabled first.

Those same Secret Service snipers, on the southern roof, might have taken out Crooks with their own silenced shot, while Trump was still speaking. They were taking fire, saw a sniper on the AGR roof, and shot back. The southern roof snipers weren't supposed to take out Crooks that quickly, before anyone attending the rally or Trump or the Secret Service agents close to Trump realized there was shooting going on.

Rather the two Secret Service sniper teams, on both the northern roof (the team shown on much video) and the southern roof (the team that took out Crooks) were supposed to already be disabled (ducking, perhaps hit, but at least off their scopes) by the silenced fire, but the wind was strong enough that the "bad" snipers didn't manage to take out the Secret Service roof snipers, before the southern roof snipers got Crooks when Crooks stuck his head up above the roof ridge, thus forcing the "bad" sniper in the room below Crooks to pick up his own (typically noisy) AR-15, to create the first three shots that would be heard, coming from the right direction (same as the just killed Crooks on the roof), at Trump.

One way or another, there had to be loud gun fire, consistent with an AR-15 firing commonly available ammunition, coming from Crooks' direction, to frame Crooks as the (by then or soon to be killed by some sniper) patsy, consistent with the "lone shooter" hypothesis.

By the way, I'd still wager, as would Jason Goodman and John Cullen, that it was actually Maxwell Yearick whose corpse we see on the AGR roof, not Thomas Matthew Crooks.

In any case, Cullens can find _no_ shot that was fired at the distance from Trump's microphone to Crooks (or Yearick) on the roof. Cullens continues to dispute the distance calculations from the crack-boom delays done by Chris Martenson and Mike Adams, while Martenson and Adams continue to ignore Cullens' work, despite several of us trying to get Martenson and Adams to look at Cullens' work. Some of the shots were at almost that distance, but Cullens calculates that those shots came from the distance of the windows of that same single story AGR building, below and closer to Trump than was Crooks on its roof.

Just quoting this to bring it to the current page and express my deep thanks for your detailed description of what was covered behind the paywall.

What did Cullens conclude about the identity of the proposed shooter from inside the window - he said in the free portion he believes he knows more about that person based on (something?)

later seen in comments - is this who he thinks was the shooter?

@theovrionides7666
14 hours ago (edited)
The officer with the tattoo sleeve is in that window shooting at Trump and he was the first one on the roof who dumped the 8 gun Cartrdges next to crooks! ( I made the correction thx )


@maeveofthelongbows9552
12 hours ago
He was in the other building on the 2nd floor The photo of Crooks by the retaining wall was taken by him. He had to have been the shooter. Plus, this window on the ground level below Crooks, is not even open. Today there was a group interview of the Beaver County team and he spoke His name is Greg Nichols


@Mr.BVogel
12 hours ago (edited)
19:08 "The kid on the roof is dead before any of you hear a single shot." WHAT?! Are you Crazy? I know you tout being great at noticing things that the average person doesn't. I commend you for. But are you skipping over all of the BASIC evidence first as a result??
The new video evidence shows Crooks popped up over the top already.
And a very OLD video from the side shows him in position aiming DURING the sound of the first shot going off (clearly not dead before any shots heard). It was even used a possible evidence of him not shooting because no recoil is seen.
But how can you miss basic stuff and go backwards now saying he was shot before any single shot was heard??

I think that does it for me here. I just had to lay this one out here for you guys.
GL

@hegemonycricket9549
8 hours ago
I'm a retired soldier. I'm very familiar with how much Crooks rifle would have bucked with each shot, and what brass being ejected looks like. I've seen neither in any of the various videos floating around. I've been saying from the start that I don't think Crooks got off a single round.


@aaronstackhouse2271
11 hours ago
But the window where we see the "muzzle flash" is closed.
5
Reply


1 reply

@jarredbaigent185
9 hours ago
Yep. Can see the reflection of grass and the red barn before and after the shots

[SilentFeathers]

Posted by Mark (Star Mariner) (here)
Also in that camp: single shooter (the water tower is ruled out for me).

If there really was another shooter, somewhere, they did a fine job at evading detection. Not easy to do given they couldn't have known in advance that any of the numerous cellphones in attendance wouldn't catch them in the act, unless extremely concealed or hidden in plain sight. I tend to believe that the only shots aimed at Trump were fired by Crooks alone.

Questions remain on the row of second floor windows of the building behind, and overlooking, Crooks's position. They, for me, continue to be a contender for the location of the sniper that delivered the final kill-shot. Which seriously begs the question: how did the security guys in that building, in those windows, miss Crooks shimmying across the roof right under their gun barrels? They cannot, yet did not act.

As for Martenson's latest video...I'm going to need an expert in ballistics and/or acoustic analysis to be swayed either way. Even better, an experiment that endeavours to duplicate what we hear in the footage -- an accurate re-enactment, on-location, in the same conditions, with high-end equipment, using the same AR15 fired from the same position on that roof. Perhaps it's the only guaranteed way to prove or disprove the existence of a second shooter.

My thinking is somewhat aligned with yours.

The first 3 shots were the controlled "killed" shots, after that 3rd shot Trump was down and covered by SS. These were the most important shots that were dialed in and meant to kill Trump IMO. The only other controlled shot(s) were the sniper taking Crooks out (shot 9 and/or 10).

If there were multiple shooters and "silent" bullets were flying from multiple locations, as Cullen suggests, why didn't one of those shooters take Trump out when they stood him back up and he exposed his head several times? The main mission that day was to kill Trump, yet with multiple shooters not one of them took another kill shot? If there were multiple shooters they had the perfect opportunity to "finish the job", but they didn't.

Now Cullen's is claiming Crooks likely didn't even take a shot, (WTF) yet every video sounds like a weapon being fired from up on that roof (shots 1 thru 8, at least 4 thru 8 for sure). I've digested about all I can take from Cullen. He makes a good point here and there but I've scratched him off my list of research sources as of yesterday.

Also, in that Stewart Film there is one frame in the clip showing the window directly below Crooks and it does appear to have some type of anomaly near the top of it that somewhat looks like an opening. It's really hard to tell though.

I'm still considering the possibility the first 3 shots came from that window, but it's looking more and more like Crooks actually did fire the first 8 shots.

[Tintin]

New close ups of the "shooter" (Crooks) from the Dave Stewart film, provided by Dave via X. Pretty good quality too:


Link: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTtSaXEW...jpg&name=large

This one is a crazy close-up. Now we can see what looks like a tripod and rifle configuration a little more clearly:


Link: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTtSeGYW...jpg&name=large

[Tintin]

More from Dave extracted from the thread link posted above:



Text:

After I was handcuffed by PSP and phone taken, we were escorted to the parking lot where you see the Butler Township cruiser. Once the Butler Township officer recognized me: he immediately removed my handcuffs. I would like to thank him - he was one of the few who did a great job
5:34 AM · Jul 30, 2024

T Bern question: So, after the shooting had stopped and “Agent Smith” took a photo of your ID, you were handcuffed and escorted to the police cruiser?

Did something happen during that time that prompted more panic? As far as I could tell in the video, the panic had stopped and the shooter had been confirmed dead long before the video ended.
5:37 AM · Jul 30, 2024

Dave answer: No, Agent Smith walked away and told me to get to cover and stay recording. I still have 6 more minutes of video after Agent Smith walks away. That will be for tomorrow. Sorry if I've been going out of order. Don't worry, the full picture will be painted
5:39 AM · Jul 30, 2024

[mountain_jim]

a couple of replies to the X post at the above link seem interesting

https://x.com/brgatling21/status/1818140115300147629

Erin
@brgatling21
·
11h
Looks like this guy who was wearing gloves


https://x.com/mdsofl/status/1818161606620017096

TheRightSide
@mdsofl
·
9h
It looks like he made it to the edge to get off roof after shots fired. The guy they took photo with gunshots is probably someone else.

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/kylenabecker/status/1818303537547223327

Kyle Becker
@kylenabecker
"This agency NEEDS to change. If not now, WHEN? The NEXT assassination in 30 days?"

JUST IN: A Secret Service counter sniper sent an email to the entire Uniformed Division on Monday night, saying that he will continue to speak out until "5 high-level supervisors (1 down) are either fired or removed from their current positions."

The counter sniper's letter, exclusively obtained by RealClearPolitics' susancrabtree, also stated that the agency "SHOULD expect another assassination attempt" before November and expressed his dissatisfaction with his role as a USSS counter sniper.

"Sadly we have fallen short for YEARS. We just look good doing it. I have conveyed these thoughts to not only supervisors (to include the current Captain of CS, but those responsible for training us (SOTS/CS). Only to be brushed off as those with less experience somehow knew more than me."

"The team I was once proud to be a part of, is something I have to somehow hide as I move into my next career," the counter sniper continued.

"Who wants to hire a USSS CS guy who failed? That's the public perception I'm not faced with. The USSS CS team is a stain I will never be able to cleanse."

"The motto of the USSS...CYA. And every supervisor is doing it right now."

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)
Here's his latest Youtube video, uploaded a few hours ago:

John Cullen Investigates: Is That Someone Shooting Out of the Window?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_7sWMEKzzAg

At 14.56 Cullen says the kid was taken out by a sniper the second he lifted his head over the ridge of the roof. He suggests the same thing at 19:10, insisting Crooks was dead before a single shot was heard. That's clearly -- provably -- not true.

I pointed out Crooks back in this post, raising his head over the top of the roof. It's at approximately 4.50 in the video.




We see him again three seconds later, this time from a different angle. He's still alive, and poised on the roof-ridge taking aim. The first shot sounds out less than two seconds later.

All this is visible from ground level, so you can be as sure as anything the roof snipers saw him. They didn't shoot.

Cullen is plainly wrong.

Further, we have the testimony of an eye-witness (posted here) who saw the whole thing and swears (at 1.36 in the video) the shots came from the guy on the roof.

It's consistent with this early piece of footage (posted here), in which we see Crooks on the roof and in position. He's alive and well and aiming his rifle the actual moment the first shot rings out.

That's a slam-dunk Cullen is wrong.

We also have an eye-witness in the Dave Stewart video, at 6.06, who states he saw the shooter (Crooks) being taken out. Nothing about it happening before the shooting started.

Dave Stewart: "Did they pick him off?"
Witness: "F*ck yeah, I saw a big poof of hair go up in the air."
Dave Stewart: "Oh f*uk yeah!"

By all means, distrust what the Secret Service says or what the FBI comes out with (I certainly do!) but citizens on the ground, patriot eye-witnesses who were actually there, conveying their experiences not days later or years, but minutes, seconds, sometimes in real-time...this is the most powerful evidence of all. It more than beats second-hand speculation from youtubers like John Cullen, or even Martenson.

At 20.35, Cullen explains to us how he sees and does things differently to other people -- that we're all morons and he's better (oh really?). At 21.15 he presents "evidence" of a shot coming from a ground floor window; he'll even show you how actually some twenty shots were fired(!), this hidden remainder using silencers.

...but you'll have put your hands in your pockets for these juicy morsels (Patreon only).

The so-called window shot is impossible. The window from which the purported muzzle flash appears is closed. It's plain as day in an earlier frame. You can see reflections in the glass.



I don't discount a window shot from somewhere, but it wasn't this window. More likely, it came from a second-storey window.

Sorry mate, with all due respect, Cullen has zero credibility. In this country we have a special name for people like this: Bullsh!t Artist. It's not only because his discernment level leaves a lot to be desired but because he's hiding content behind a paywall -- he's trying to make money from this situation.

[SilentFeathers]

This is ridiculous, the SS acting director is worse that Kim Cheatle.

It's beyond obvious that they are covering this up and that NO ONE will be held accountable.

LIVE: Trump shooting FBI Senate hearing on Thomas Crooks, drone, shooting timeline LiveNOW from FOX

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=feEtrGRIgxw

[Tintin]

Posted by SilentFeathers (here)
This is ridiculous, the SS acting director is worse that Kim Cheatle.

It's beyond obvious that they are covering this up and that NO ONE will be held accountable.

LIVE: Trump shooting FBI Senate hearing on Thomas Crooks, drone, shooting timeline LiveNOW from FOX

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=feEtrGRIgxw

For sure

(It may be a me thing and it's really not important at all, but every time I see the abbreviation SS I'm not translating that as 'Secret Service', more the Nazi iteration, although one could maybe make a case for there really not being much difference, now, when/if subterfuge can be demonstrably proven, as is fast becoming the case. Jus' saying )

[SilentFeathers]

This is the window that was directly below Crooks.

I ran it through my software I use for my photography. I cropped in and then used AI enhancement/upscaling and AI noise reduction and sharpening.

The photo grab from the video was poor resolution to start with but it did turn out rather good.
The anomaly I mentioned in an earlier post appears to be duct tape across the top of the window (upper left). Looks like there is a gap there.
It does look like the window is broke near the bottom with a small piece of glass missing.

All in all it appears to be slim pickins' that a weapon was fired through that window.

http://photos.fife.usercontent.google.com/pw/AP1GczPTeNTRRIO8jCuNz6qtm430s7RwkJoQ-1Grrc9mWZX38EgjmGALyfmfnQ=w1164-h1263-s-no-gm?authuser=0

The link will take you to the image of the window that I enhanced.

[lightpotential]

Posted by mountain_jim (here)

Posted by ThePythonicCow (here)

Posted by Tintin (here)
From my perspective it's not so much not paying attention to it, for me Martenson is taking a rock-solidly sensible largely grounded approach, and is data gathering, in the main, and drawing some sensible conclusions based on that, and I like the way he does that.

Martenson is doing sensible analysis, yes ... of the evidence he considers.

He refuses, despite a variety of us trying to encourage him to consider, some of the other evidence.

Last week, Cullen's presented some quite compelling evidence of at least one shot coming from the water tower or trees close thereto. This was a shot that is visually evident, but not audibly evident.

He continues to present further compelling evidence of other shots, and also quite careful calculations of the shot timings that differ critically from the calculations of Martenson and Mike Adams.

If you don't consider what Cullens is finding, you won't yet know if he is finding evidence that Martenson and Adams haven't considered.

I agree with you here.

I think Martenson has responded to Cullens dismissively, twice (that I know of) saying folks' reflex reactions to shots being fired can not be considered evidence. But Cullens earlier video analysis shows more than that, with clothing moved, etc.

(now I will watch latest (free portion) Cullen video you posted)

I have looked very carefully at the work of Cullen. The key points that I have seen him make have been totally disproved – even by me. I looked in particular at the interview that he gave on Infowars when he was talking to Owen Shroyer.

Cullen is fantasising about gunshots that never happened on the back row of the bleachers to the left of Trump. I dissected frame by frame the video that he himself was looking at just following the first shot being fired.

It is important to note that the time difference between the sonic boom crack over Trump's microphone and the subsequent sound wave of the shot passing over it is 0.22 of one second. This is similar to shots two and three.

Analysing the footage in real-time revealed that when the bullet struck the back of the bleachers, resulting in the metallic dust cloud, several members near to the back row of the bleachers jolted in Unison in a single frame. That was exactly 8 frames after the metallic dust cloud.

The video was at 30 frames per second. 8 / 30 = 0.26666 seconds.

It looks to me that the people that jolted in shock did so because the sound wave of the bullet had just reached them. The analysis is very decisive when considered carefully. The margin of error being more than acceptable.

Cullen claims that some of the people who jumped in Unison in the bleachers at the critical moment - eight frames after the bullet hit the corner railing - were shot. They absolutely were not shot.

One man in particular Cullen claims was shot in the pocket area. This is the blurred footage that he was using in his analysis on Infowars. Another piece of footage that more clearly captures the man in question reveals that he simply moved his hand and arm in front of his body.

On another point, I saw another researcher do some trigonometry to establish that the water tower could not have been a place to shoot at Donald Trump from. The big LED screen overlooking the bleacher’s to Trump's right was too high. It blocked the shot.

If Cullen, as of this date, has not revised his position in light of these things, then I think he is a poor researcher indeed.

In fact, I will say that I did not like his manner during the interview with Owen on Infowars. He did not conduct himself well, shall we say.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by SilentFeathers (here)

https://photos.fife.usercontent.goog...-gm?authuser=0

The link will take you to the image of the window that I enhanced.

Link doesn't work :/

Posted by SilentFeathers (here)
All in all it appears to be slim pickins' that a weapon was fired through that window.

Slim indeed. Even if there was a small gap in the glass at the bottom, it's not consistent with where the 'muzzle flash' is. Think we can rule that out.

To dispel any lingering doubt the window was shut, here's a few better quality images of the AGR building. From these we can deduce the style of window installed across the complex, and the manner in which they open: it's outwards. Had the window in question been open even a small amount it would've been plainly visible in the Stewart footage. It isn't; the window was closed. I believe it's safe to conclude that at the time of the shooting all ground floor windows were closed.

These images were taken from drone video released by Spa Guy.

From side-on


Close up


A window opened outwards (from the Eli Crane video)