Does This Video Prove the "Trump Assassination Attempt" Was a Hoax?
Usually stuff like this is easy to debunk, but...
Postscript: It’s now about five hours after I posted this article, and among the 38 generally excellent comments, several commenters—Vic Hughes, Kent Klizbe, Julius Skoolafish, and Richard among them —all diagnosed an obvious potential weakness in the videomaker’s argument. Scroll down to the comments for details. I appreciate everyone’s help in figuring this out! I try to cultivate a smart audience, and it really helps when these situations arise. Three cheers for the wisdom of crowds! -Kevin
The above video appears to show the first three shots being fired in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 13. According to the official story, the second of these three shots nicked Trump’s ear. The problem is that we can see that the Secret Service sniper, not Thomas Matthew Crooks, fires the shots. And we can see that the second shot cannot have nicked Trump’s ear, because the Secret Service sniper is aiming in a completely different direction (presumably at Crooks).
I looked through the comments on the video in search of a convincing rebuttal. There isn’t one. The only extant attempts to debunk the “sniper took the first three shots” thesis turns out to be smoke-blowing and misdirection, mostly involving claims that shots fired after these first three are relevant to the argument, which they obviously are not.
At this point in my admittedly cursory investigation of the above video, there are basically two possibilities: (1) the video is what it purports to be, proving the “Trump assassination attempt” was fake; (2) the videomaker is a hoaxer assisted by commenters who pretend to be debunkers but intentionally offer invalid debunkings to surreptitiously support the videomaker’s thesis.
Since I have so many sharp, savvy subscribers and readers—including you—I am asking for help. What am I missing? If this video is not slam-dunk proof that the “Trump shooting” was faked, can you explain why not?
As I have outlined in previous articles, I think it is overwhelmingly likely that the shooting is a hoax, based on probabilities of:
*A 20-year-old autistic rifle-club reject with no relevant skills whatsoever coming within inches of killing Trump, a man who is supposedly being hunted by the world’s top deep state and/or Iranian kill teams.
*The first-ever shooting at a Trump rally just happening to give the Trump campaign the best imaginable PR stunt, worth tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.
*The alleged assault rifle bullet beating billion-to-one odds and somehow nicking Trump’s ear for a perfect PR stunt without ripping it off and causing a massive concussion.
*The photographer beating million-to-one odds by capturing “proof” that the second bullet was on a trajectory to hit Trump’s ear.
So it wouldn’t surprise me if this video provided even more proof. Nor would it surprise me if it were a misdirection attempt—“bait” for people like me to snap up and later be discredited if it turns out to be bogus.
So which is it? Please weigh in on the comments section, supporting your assertions with relevant links.
I comment as a surgeon and former US Marine. From the video of Trump at the time of the bullet's "impact", his movements appear slow--even rehearsed--because when a high velocity bullet passes close to the ear, the sharp crack of the projectile passing the sound barrier is quite frightening and would cause a normal person to react reflexively. He would have just dove to the ground. Then seeing Trump at the RNC on stage with a tiny band-aid leaving a portion of the lower ear auricle exposed, there was no evidence of the post-traumatic hemorrhage which in the ear auricle would be undeniably evident with massive swelling causing a severe hematoma, a collection of coagulated blood under the thin surface of its skin covering. Finally, the wound is too neat and small. A 5.56 mm bullet traveling at about 3000 ft/sec packs a tremendous wallop. Even striking the tip of his ear would have caused a near amputation. I am beginning to think we have been hoodwinked by the same people who filmed Neal Armstrong walking on the moon, a.k.a. Area 51 in Nevada.
the acoustics shows a totally different story due to the supersonic bullets arriving well before (.23 and .13 seconds) the sound of gunshots. That wouldn't happen with the SS guy on the roof firing the shots. Of course the location and timing of the victims in the stands is also critical.
Note in the video, during the shootings, the SS sniper pulls his eyes off the telescope. No professional snipper would do that. The gun moves when he reacquires the eye piece. There is no need for the motion to be caused by the gun firing.
That said, there is a lot of weird shit going on. Like the SS head saying in a hearing yesterday they know exactly how many shots were fired and from which guns, but they are not going to tell us. That will totally resolve the issue in the video assuming we are told the truth. Good luck with that.
Strange doing going on in this assassination show, and it is very unclear what the true story is, but the one proposed in this video it isn't.