The following is likely to be my last update on the hypothesis that the assassination attempt was staged. At this point, I have a high degree of confidence that this event was staged and I have been disappointed by how little attention this hypothesis has received by the research community (I attempted to explain why that is the case). If I'm wrong then I would love for the researchers to do a thorough rebuttal but until then, I will stick with the understanding that the assassination was most likely staged. Also, I've spent more time on this that I wish I would have spent on it (I'm sure all of researchers are in the same boat), so here is my final take:
I think the deep state was involved in this operation but the case I’ll be making below is that this assassination attempt was likely staged.
Indeed, many of us in the “truther” community came to the conclusion that Trump, to the same extent as Biden, is a deep state asset. If this is true, it would then be difficult to explain why the deep state would want to assassinate their front-running candidate.
You may find ridiculous the idea that Trump is a deep state asset when the narrative that Trump is fighting the deep state is broadly accepted. However, did you know that Trump has numerous deep state ties including with the Rothschild, Epstein and Soros? Also, how to explain the involvement of Trump in the deep state Qanon psyop (through the Qproofs) if Trump is going after the deep state? In 2016, Trump got elected on the promise that he will drain the swamp but instead of draining it, he appointed the swamp to his administration (Barr, Ross, Acosta who were all associates of Epstein). Some Trump's supporters often give Trump a pass because he was new to the political game. Others allude to Qanon related narratives such as "Trump plays 4D chess with the deep state" to justify Trump's poor appointee choices. However, those excuses are now moot and still Trump surrounds himself with people whose actions go against what his MAGA base would like to see. For instance, J.D. Vance new Trump's VP pick is a protégé of Peter Thiel who is advancing the surveillance state agenda which explicitly targets Trump's supporters. Despite this glaring contradiction, Trump said to be happy with his choice. Still, if you don't believe that Trump is likely a deep state asset, I recommend you watched these two mirrored videos from Jake Morphonios (most of his research had been taken off the internet):
https://www.bitchute.com/video/WpxeUOiWikO9
https://www.bitchute.com/video/QAW9y6emuHWB
Also here is an insightful interview from whitneywebb (npub1g05…40hv) on the Trump/Vance/Thiel trio:
https://www.youtube.com/live/8BqVnOu1WBs?t=3166
Most people who have discounted the hypothesis that this attempt was staged did it on the basis of their bias on Trump. They claim that "Trump couldn't have staged it" (not considering that the deep state would have done it) or that "of course the deep state would want to kill Trump" hence it's obvious that this was a real assassination attempt. Others have assumed that for the event to be staged, the shooter would have had to aim at Trump's ear without injuring/killing Trump which is impossible and/or too dangerous. I agree that this would be too dangerous of a stunt to be pulled off but this is only refutting the strawman. Which evidence do we have to support that a bullet actually grazed Trump's ear? Could this scene be more akin to a magic show in which the perception that Trump was actually shot at was an illusion?
Below are the three elements that lead many to believe that Trump was shot at:
1. photographs:
From Doug Mills:
Bullet passing by Trump:
[See attached photo]
Blood on Trump's right hand after touching his ear:
[See attached photo]
2. ballistic sound analysis:
By Chris Martenson:
https://youtu.be/LouUbMYb7Bc
https://youtu.be/TF4RFPXcTlI
3. ballistic trajectory analysis:
By John Cullen:
https://odysee.com/@BretWeinstein:f/how-many-shooters-john-cullen-on-the:2?t=3820
Are these elements indisputable proofs that a bullet grazed Trump's ear or that Trump was shot at? I would say no and here is why.
First regarding the photographs, it’s important to note that these photos were taken by Doug Mills who is a renowned photographer but also part of the “mockingbird media sphere”. Interesting fact, did you know that he’s the photographer who took the photo of Bush in a classroom when being notified of the 9/11 attacks? (source: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/26/doug-mills-iconic-president-photos-226744/ / https://www.tampabay.com/news/nation-world/2021/09/10/during-sarasota-visit-president-george-w-bush-learned-of-911-attack/ ). Doug Mills has covered many Presidents so it’s not necessarily improbable that he was with Bush on 9/11, however what are the chances that he would be covering a small Trump’s rally? Has Doug Mills covered other Trump’s rallies? If not, he’s for sure very lucky to have been attending this one.
Also, I’m not an expert in photo forensic but until we have the confirmation from multiple independent experts that these photos haven’t been tampered with, I wouldn’t consider these photographic evidences as indisputable. It's even possible that these photos could have been edited in way that is undetectable especially as image tampering tech is getting more sophisticated with for instance the use of neural network-based methods. If the deep state has this capability, you can be sure that they would make use of it. What if the bullet and blood would have been added to the originals? I’ve looked at the video of the shooting and while the resolution is not very good, I couldn’t see any trace of blood on Trump’s right hand. This element is certainly worth investigating further.
Screenshots from the video showing no apparent trace of blood:
[See attached photo]
[See attached photo]
Also, the bullet that can be seen in the photo is the one from the first shot (before Trump reached for his right ear) which allegedly grazed Trump's right ear. If you draw the direction of the bullet (red line) and assuming that the bullet passed closed enough to Trump's right side to grazed part of his face, it doesn't appear that the bullet would have grazed Trump's ear. At best, it would have touched the bottom of his ear whereas the photo of his allege injury indicates that the impact would have located in his upper ear. This observation could actually be the smoking gun validating the hypothesis of the staged assassination. Indeed, if the picture of the first bullet couldn't have grazed Trump's ear then only two scenarios are possible:
1. The picture is real but Trump simulated his injury
2. The picture has been tampered with and we have evidence that a key element of the official narrative was faked which would make highly credible the idea that many other elements could have been faked.
Either scenario would confirm that the assassination attempt was staged.
Could this be the reason (besides getting caught lying under oath) why Christopher Wray, FBI Director, would refuse to recognize that Trump got grazed by a bullet and instead a shrapnel could have caused his injury? (source: youtu.be/RxmqdhLxN3E) Maybe they are aware that this photo hasn't been perfectly edited or maybe this photo wasn't perfectly edited on purpose so that the narrative could be shift in the scenario in which the idea that this event was staged would become broadly accepted.
[See attached photo]
[See attached photo]
Second regarding the ballistic sound analysis, the audio provided by Trump's microphone provides evidence that most of the shots passed near Trump's microphone as we can hear the supersonic shockwave left by the bullets passing in proximity of the microphone (that precede the sound signature of the reports). However, in the hypothesis in which no bullet were aimed at Trump, could it be possible for the supersonic shockwave to have been faked as if they would have been picked up by Trump's microphone? Based on a cursory research that I have made, it seems possible to fake the signature of a supersonic shockwave to a microphone either by using electronic components small enough to be dissimulated or by tinkering with a limiter and gate of the microphone. The latter could potentially explain why Trump's microphone appears to have a limiter and gate signature (source: https://youtu.be/TF4RFPXcTlI?t=1972). Maybe there could be other explanations for it and my goal isn't to provide a definitve technical explanation but my point being that it appears possible that this auditory evidence could have been faked.
Third, regarding the ballistic trajectory, we don't have any evidence (besides the photo and supersonic shockwaves discussed earlier) of any bullet having passed by Trump. The fact Corey Comperatore and other rallygoers who were shot at were in the line of sight of Crooks aiming at Trump doesn't prove that any bullet were actually shot in this direction. For this we would need, to know where did the bullets land and which gun there were shot from. Unfortunately, the FBI hasn't provided any of these details. Or we would need video evidence proving that a bullet has taken this direction, which we don't have either. The only video evidence showing a clear trajectory was analyzed by John Cullen and it shows that the first shot wasn't fired from Crooks' position and wasn't aimed at Trump. Here again, a "line of casualties" coherent with the hypothesis that Crooks was the one taking the shots at Trump could have been faked by other shooters aiming at targets (i.e. Corey Comperatore) who were in Crooks' line of sight.
In conclusion, at this time we don't have any evidence allowing us to indisputably conclude that any shot was aimed at Trump. Ballistic forensics don't definitively prove that any shot was aimed at Trump. The photo of the bullet showing a trajectory that is inconsistent with the official narrative even seems to indicate that the event was staged.
#Trump #TrumpAssassination #StagedAssassination #EarGate #PsyOp #FalseFlag #DeepState
