• Print
• Email

Trump Assassination Questions: Assassin - or Patsy

Details

Created: Tuesday, 16 July 2024 21:10

Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

It's been some time since I've written anything. Nothing like an assassination attempt to get the creative juices flowing - so here goes...

Numerous questions surround the events of the day, and so far, questions are more abundant than answers. I've got at least one question that's not been widely asked, and I've also got a brand new conspiracy theory to answer all the questions I'll ask.

-1. The alleged shooter is said to have used an AR-15.  It's also been widely reported that he crawled across the rooftop and was confronted by an officer, who he pointed the AR-15 at, and then almost immediately opened fire. The distance between the shooter and Trump was about 150 yards. That is well within "sniper range," if using "sniper equipment," but an AR-15 is NOT a sniper rifle. Yes, it has an effective range much greater than 150 yards, but even with advanced optics and a tripod or other stabilizing device a "bench fired" AR-15 has an MOA of about 1.5. That is, at 100 yards a typical AR-15, when securely bench fired, would shoot a pattern no smaller than 1.5 inches. (at 150 yards it would be 2-1/4 inches). By comparison, elite sniper rifles fire at an MOA of .25, that is, 6X more accurate than the weapon reported to have been used with an expected variance pattern at 150 yards to be 3/8". To date, there's been no mention of how the weapon was configured, but it seems implausible that the shooter would be able to configure a tri-pod or bi-pod to stabilize the weapon, and even if he did, he would have to raise it to confront the police officer and then re-aim in a matter of seconds. Point here is that it's a difficult shot with an AR-15 in a best case scenario, and a very unlikely shot in the scenario described, which results in the question:

Did a 20 year old with minimal weapons training really place a .556 round on Donald Trumps ear from 150 yards away?

-2  The alleged shooter was observed on the roof at least two full minutes prior to firing, and some reports are as long as 26 minutes. ABC News is reporting that the Secret Service first spotted the shooter a full 20 minutes prior to the first shot being fired. While some have mentioned the "pitched roof" providing cover for the gunman, the observation point of the counter sniper was considerably higher in elevation than the shooter's position, and it would appear that he would have been visible anywhere near the peak of the roof, if not the entire roof, except for the areas where sight line was impaired by tree cover. I've included a sight line diagram below derived from a google image of the two buildings. While one may understand the reluctance of counter snipers to engage within two minutes; one cannot understand why there was no attempt to move or shield Trump until after shots were fired. It seems implausible that the counter sniper unit had no communication with ground level security to issue orders to MOVE TRUMP NOW!

 

 

This of course raises the next question: 

Why was President Trump allowed to take the stage, and remain on stage, when Secret Service was fully aware of an imminent threat within 150 yards?

-3  There has been considerable confusion over the location from which the shots were taken - although I've not heard this discrepancy raised by others - I believe it's an important point when considering the evidence of this crime. Within the first 24 hours of the shooting, the location of the shooter was reported to be near the South end of the roof, which was closest to the Trump stage as shown in the following image.

This approximate location as shown above was reported by The New York Post, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX, USA Today, Newseek, Financial Times, RTE, and local affiliates Fox 59 and WSAW7.  All of these organizations, in addition to many others, published similar images of the location of the shooter. In the configuration as shown above, all of the key elements of the shooting appear to be consistent. The shooters position is nearly the closest position to the target, and the shooters position is comfortably in the sight line of the countersniper on the Northern most rooftop of the buildings behind the stage. There is published video in the US Sun (screenshot below) of this countersniper firing his weapon to eliminate the alleged shooter.  Given the existence of privately taken video evidence of the countersniper on the North building firing his weapon, it seems irrefutable that this was the countersniper that fired the shots to eliminate the shooter.

 

There is a significant inconsistency, however, with the images that purport to show the location of the alleged shooter. There have been numerous published photos supposedly showing the shooters lifeless body, his rifle, and what appears to be an abandoned backpack on the roof, as well as the ladder that was supposedly used to access the roof. These images show the location of the shooter to be close to the North end of the building.

There are several puzzling aspects to the rooftop image below. It is a widely published image that purports to be taken shortly after the shooting. It depictly the ladder that was supposedly used to access the roof (inside the yellow box outline), the body, weapon and backpack of the shooter. While I'm far from a forensics expert, I was surprised by the lack of blood in the photo. The shooter was supposedly shot on this slightly sloped white metal roof. It would seem reasonable that there would be noticable blood stains on the roof, which likely would create a visible pool of blood or run down the roof panels making a fairly noticable line of blood on the roof. The roof appears to be free of any blood staining. Also puzzling is the location of the weapon. These appear to be 24" standing seam roof panels, which would place the weapon about eight feet from the body. Perhaps this is possible, but seems unusual for someone to reflexively throw their weapon eight feet to the left when shot dead.

The perspective of the Sky News photo is also interesting. It's taken from an elevated position. It would seem to be a helicopter or drone image. It's possible a media helicopter was able to get this image from a significant distance with a telescopic lens, but the image angle seems to be relatively directly overhead. It's hard to imagine that any drone or copter would be cleared to be airborne this close to an ongoing assassination attempt, which leads one to suspect this image was taken by some law enforcement agency and circulated to the media - or maybe just another mistake. 

The inconsistency of the location of the shooter, leads to other inconsistencies. Most glaring is, from the Sky News rooftop location, it doesn't appear that the countersniper in the North building would have a clean line of sight to the shooter. The countersniper in the North building is the only countersniper that has been reported as firing. The image below to the left though, shows the sight line from the North building position, to the location of the body in the Sky News rooftop image and the sight line is badly obstructed by the trees. Seems unlikely that the countersniper would take this shot through an obstructed sight line, and accuracy firing through branches and leaves is questionable.  The image to the right, however, shows the sight line of the countersniper positioned in the South building. It seems that this is a clear and unobstructed sight line, but all reports so far, and one video record - show the shots being fired from the North location. It would seem possible that both countersnipers fired, but the audio recordings (at least what I've heard) don't support the theory of additional gunfire leading to 2 part question:

Where was the shooter's location, and which countersniper fired the shot that killed him?

So we have two conflicting shooter locations, one which is consistent with countersniper fire from the North position, and one that is consistent with the countersniper fire from the South position - but we only have evidence of gunfire from the North position, and we only have visual evidence of a body location that would suggest countersniper fire from the South position.

There were also early eye witness reports of there being two shooters. This could be fairly easy to discount. Gunfire often creates echos and panic blurs the senses, but there has also been some reasonably credible analysis of the sound that suggests the possibility of a third shooter. The sound evidence also raises serious questions. Perhaps the clearest way to listen is on the FOX 5 New York You Tube post. I suggest turning the playback speed down to .25 to hear the eerie details of the gunfire. The supersonic "zip" of the bullet crossing the microphone is clearly separated from the much slower gunfire sound when played at that speed. On this video, all gunfire occurs between the 7 second and 23 second time mark on the video. There are between 6 and 8 shots fired from the 7 second point to the 14 second point. First a group of three, then a group of 3 - 5 shots, then a pause of 9 seconds, with one final shot. On the final shot, one can only hear the "zip" of the bullet, but not the sound of the gunfire. My guess would be that would indicate it was the countersniper who killed the alleged shooter, and he was firing a suppressed weapon. I don't have any evidence if the counter snipers were using suppressed weapons, but it's been reported previously that it is common practice to do so. (excerpt below)

So far, we're not sure from which position shots were fired, and even though we have supposed video evidence that the countersniper fired from the North position, it seems to conflict with audio evidence, and the practicality of the sight line. The shooters position deserves more scrutiny. Notice that there is a two story building only 40' behind the peak of the roofline of the building that the alleged shooter was shooting from. There are two windows that fall within the area that it's possible shots could be fired from.

In the image above, the "location of suspected gunman's body" is incorrectly reported based on previous video evidence; but as previously stated, this location was originally identified as the shooters location by numerous outlets. It's difficult to not notice that there are two windows behind the reported shooters location, both which are possibly in line with the trajectory of the bullet that struck President Trump's ear. Zooming in on the photo above, it seems clear that one of the windows is OPEN. This would generally indicate all of the windows in this building are operable.

Now we may be on to something....

Previously, we were skeptical that a relatively inexperienced shooter, without sniper equipment, and a modest AR-15, could make a 150 yard shot. If, however, one changes the scenario to a fully mounted sniper rifle, modern optics, and an expert marksman from only about 15 yards further distance which is concealed and protected from sight - it becomes almost a "layup" to put a shot on target. It seems there is significant reason to believe the shot that hit Donald Trump was fired from near the South end of the roof under the windows, rather than from the North end of the roof where the alleged shooter's body was found. There is one piece of evidence that could be virtually definitive, that no one could have planned for. That is, the top of Trump's ear was shot off, while neither the front, nor the back of his head was touched. This means the trajectory of the bullet was exactly parallel to the side of Trump's head. The exact position of Trump's head, will point directly to the location of the shooter.

Let's summarize the trajectory angles in a single image

Let's look at the options.

Option 1 - Trajectory from the location of the alleged shooter's dead body to Trump's ear. Yes, this is possible, but this would require Trump to have turned his head almost a full 90 degrees from the front facing stage.

Option 2 - Trajectory from either the Window 1 or Window 2 location. In this scenario, Trump's head is turned closer to 60 degrees. Let's take look at Trump at the moment of impact. 

It would appear that Trump's head position, relative to the podium, is somewhat less than a full 90 degrees. Observing the position of the front of the bill of his MAGA cap, it's clear that the front of the bill is not close to perpendicular to the front of the podium. This angle strongly suggests that the shot that struck Trump's ear, was fired from either Window position 1 or Window position 2 - or that the shooter was on the South portion of the roof, about 60 feet from where his body was found. From an overhead view, of the previous trajectory angle image magnified 4X - the question looks like this: 

To me, it seems far more likely that Trump's head was in Position 1. Consider, both of his hands are on the side of the podium. His shoulder's are not square to the podium, but the turn of his head still seems to be far less than 90 degrees as would need to be as shown in position 2 - IF the shot that hit Trump's ear came from the location of the shooter's body.

So what really happened?

Crooks was not the shooter. Crooks was a patsy. Unfortunately, one need not stretch ones imagination very far to based on past history to reach this conclusion.

Remember the FBI helping to plan the kidnapping of Governor Gretchen Whitmire which resulted in the not guilty findings for several defendants?

Remember glorious FBI agent Peter Strzock who boasted to his FBI lover, "We'll stop.." Trump from becoming President?

Keeping in mind the committment of the Justice Department to STOP TRUMP at any cost, and the amount of powerful interests that stand to take huge losses with likely drastic changes of policy on Iran, Ukrain, and China, (among others) - is it really a big stretch the imagine a division of the DOJ organizing an assassination of Trump?

So, here's my original conspiracy theory on how it went down...

Crooks was identified while on routine investigation of the area. A member of a local shooting club, loner, no social media presence, no close friends. A Fed makes a point to observe some of his shooting and approaches him, "Hey kid, pretty impressive shooting ... - you train a lot?"

From that point, they slowly reel him in. After gaining his confidence, they explain they need some additional help outside the secured perimeter. Ya know, budget cuts and all, but he could be a real asset and they'd  pay him in cash. Brooks is instructed on where to be, and what to observe from the vantage point on the South portion of the roof. He was said to have had a "communication device" that was configured to blow up explosives in his car. More likely a communication device to coax him into proper position and assure him he was "on the team."

This explains his being observed for 20 minutes by Secret Service without firing a shot, or even issuing a warning to Trump.It's also crucial to the patsy story that others saw him on the roof prior to the shooting. There needed to be NO DOUBT who the shooter was. Worth noting, while numerous people report seeing Brooks on the roof, there is no witness of Brooks firing a shot.

Now, Brooks in position is reported to have "locked eyes" with a countersniper, who probably gave the "thumbs up" sign letting Brooks know once again, he was, "on the team."  Suddenly, without warning, shots are fired. From the vantage point of the shooter in a window behind Brooks, Trump is hit with the first shot. His hand goes up, he goes down, shooter assumes Trump dead. The real sniper continues to fire random shots knowing that he needs chaos to ensue. Brooks realizes this is all going bad and shots are coming from behind him. He grabs his rifle and sprints toward the North end of the building where his ladder was placed. This accounts for the 6.5 second delay between the first grouping of shots, and the final shot which killed Brooks while running to the North and also explains his rifle being 8 feet North of his dead body.

Now everything ties out.

-The shot, from an experienced sniper, with accurate sniper equipment, located in a hidden position in a window behind Brooks - is a very makeable shot.

-Brooks was allowed to be seen on the roof by numerous people - because he HAD to be seen to remove any doubt who the shooter was.

-Brooks was shot while fleeing, by the countersniper in the South position, which accounts for the position of Brooks rifle.

-Or maybe, a 20 year old loner meanered around a just outside the secured perimeter of a highly secured area, scaled a roof with a rifle, fired 9 shots, stopped shooting for 6 seconds, and then tossed his rifle 8 feet to the North as a result of having his head blown off.

Which sound crazier?

 

 

Add a comment

• Print
• Email

Good Team Dysphoria - The Root of Baker Hatred

Details

Created: Sunday, 24 April 2022 19:44

Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

Been a long time since the last post. Taking a break from the normal political rant and delving into my old hometown football team, the Cleveland Browns...

Since about mid-season 2021, I've percieved a growing sentiment of negativity towards Baker Mayfield. Not all, but for many Browns fans, the simmering negativity has grown into rolling boil of raging hatred

I grew up in Cleveland. Have vivid memories of the outstanding Browns teams that battled in the NFL title game in 1968 and 1969; the heartbreaking playoff loss to the Raiders in 1980, and of course the 3 AFC Championship games in 4 years against the Broncos. I was at the Stadium to witness the crushing loss of "The Drive." I was also furious that the "Browns" packed up and moved to Baltimore, and at the time, glad that Cleveland managed to keep the "Browns" name and records.  Now I'm not so sure.

I moved to Austin in 1983, but have remained a Browns fan. Living in Austin also gave me the opportunity to become familiar with a talented local area quarterback named Baker Mayfield. I didn't follow Mayfield closely while he was in High School, but certainly took note of his college career as he bounced from Tech to land in OU. I recall watching the Oklahoma / Ohio State game when Mayfield famously planted the OU flag in Buckeye Stadium. I remember thinking, "That's the kid from Travis !".

When Baker was drafted number 1 overall by the "New Browns," in 2018; I was thrilled that the "kid from Travis" would be playing for the Browns and maybe he could help restore some of the old glory of the once mighty Cleveland Browns. When Baker Mayfield took his first snap as a Cleveland Brown, the Browns had won 2 of their last 47 games and were trailing by 2 touchdowns.  Baker lead the Browns to a comeback victory that night, the first win in about a season and a half; and since that game the Browns  have been a relevant playoff contender every week right up until the last week of last season.  Yet, though Baker was disappointing last year while playing through several injuries, the Browns "sold the farm" to get Deshaun Watson to replace him.  Still, the Baker hatred rages on, seeming to grow more intense every day. For some time I found this puzzling. But I believe I've figured it out.

 Browns Baker Haters have "Good Team Dysphoria"

See, the original "Cleveland Browns"; the team founded by Mickey McBride, that eventually was sold to Art Modell; were a fantastic franchise. In fact, that franchise is the winningest franchise in the history of the NFL. But that team moved to Baltimore, and is now called "The Ravens." The Expansion Browns, who began in 1999, are actually the losingest franchise in NFL history - and it's not even close. During the time that Baker Mayfield was quarterbacking the Expansion Browns, they were a dead even .500 team; that had some fantastic games, and some frustrating, disappointing games. But - even that whiff of competitive play was enough to evoke the memories of the "Original Browns" in the minds of Browns Baker Haters; creating a mental illness akin to Gender Dysphoria - I'll call it "Good Team Dysphoria."

See, the Expansion Browns are not a good team. In reality, they are the most dismal, hapless, excuse for a football team that has ever existed in NFL History. The ownership, front office, and team management could be used to define the term "shit show."  But, the flirtation with success that the Expansion Browns experienced in the past 4 years caused the Baker Haters, to believe they were watching the organization of sustained success that moved to Baltimore, and believe the only thing keeping them from achieving Super Bowl domination was BAKER MAYFIELD. Graphically, it looks something like this:

Hence, much like those who suffer from Gender Dyphoria, the Baker Haters, suffering from Good Team Dysphoria; have come to believe that if only they could rid themselves of one particular aspect of their being - all would be well. But, the reality, for the vast majority, is somthing quite different.

To put it bluntly, even if you think Baker Mayfield is a dick, you're unlikely to turn into a princess just because you managed to get rid of him...

Add a comment

• Print
• Email

Really?

Details

Created: Wednesday, 12 January 2022 15:16

Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

There's been a post circulating on the internet from someone named Veronika McKee that describes the "upside" of the insane response that many governments and organizations have had to the Covid-19 Pandemic. It's an upbeat and hopeful post, but I have to say that it doesn't look like an objective take on reality to me. In fact, my observations are almost opposite. I've taken the liberty of writing a "counter point." I'll post the original after mine, and everyone can decide which is closer to reality.

They couldn’t go to the pool, so they stayed home and drank beer or soda to cool off

They couldn’t go to restaurants so they ordered Grubb Hub and watched Netflix

They couldn’t go to clubs so they got hooked on internet porn and masturbation

They couldn’t go to the gym so they bought a home fitness device and used it to dry clothes while getting fat

They couldn’t go to grocery stores so they bought chips at 7-11

They couldn’t go to sports events so they subscribed to NFL ticket and NBA League Pass

They were told they couldn’t travel but decided not to travel because they didn’t know how they’d be treated when they got there anyway

They lost their jobs so they took whatever handouts were available, then turned to crime or homelessness in their despair

They lost friends and family and wondered if they ever really had any to begin with

Everything that’s happening is totally insane, and inhumane

They often wondered how they could be criminalized for being healthy

In fact, wondered if freedom was always an illusion that could be revoked at any time

What we build now is the future

I wouldn’t mistake this era for anything but the culmination of a creeping tyranny that has metastasized over the past 50 years

It’s past time for the Sovereign to awaken

It's time for this to end

And now the original - you decide...

 

 

Add a comment