Evidence Shows At Least Two Shooters Were In Butler, PA
It’s time to lay out information that cannot be ignored. The attempted assassination of Donald Trump on July 13 was deemed to be conducted by a lone shooter. Isn’t it always that case? Think Lee Harvey Oswald. Think Sirhan Sirhan. Call me jaded, but enough evidence on JFK’s assassination has come out to cast a wide net of doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald was even involved. Many now say he was groomed to be the patsy.
And just recently, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. explained in an interview how the narrative of Sirhan Sirhan killing his father was false, and that it was Thane Eugene Cesar who was the actual shooter. Cesar was hired as a security guard at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles just one day prior to RFK’s assassination.
And yet, in both assassinations, we were told the shooter was a lone gunman.
Again, call me jaded. I don’t buy it.
Hunter Biden’s Laptop
Remember when the New York Post broke the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop three weeks before the 2020 presidential election? And remember that 51 former U.S. intelligence officials signed a letter stating the Biden laptop story had all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign?
We now know the laptop story was accurate, and the FBI knew it from day one.
That means we also now know that 51 former intelligence officials conspired to keep Americans from learning the truth. Yes. Intelligence officials in our own government were misleading us. And it’s a fair bet to say that they did not want Donald Trump to have four more years in the White House.
The Audio Evidence is Clear
We are being told that 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks was the lone gunman in the attempt on Trump’s life on July 13.
After reviewing the evidence that’s come out so far, I’m not buying it.
Most damning are the audio recordings of the event. But I’m not going to explain it all, I want you to hear it for yourself.
The following video was released on July 18 by Chris Martenson, co-founder of Peak Prosperity. Martenson holds a Ph.D. in pathology from Duke University, and his analysis of the audio clearly indicates that shots were fired from two separate locations.
The video is 32 minutes long, and I highly recommend people listen to the entire analysis. However, if you have only 90 seconds, jump ahead to the 18:00 minute mark and listen for 90 seconds. You will hear two distinctly different sounding guns.
After listening to / watching that video several times, I now have half a mind to collect 51 signatures from forensic ballistic experts stating that audio analysis of the shooting of Donald Trump indicates at least two shooters were involved – thus disproving the government’s narrative that Thomas Matthew Crooks was a lone gunman.
Call me jaded if you like. I just no longer trust the narrative when these things happen. And when the official government report on this incident comes out, unless it states that two gunmen were involved, I will not believe it.
This assassination attempt requires a full-blown investigation by people from OUTSIDE our government, because at this point, unless the narrative changes to say two shooters were involved, I’m inclined to think what happened leans toward treason.
Changes Are Needed
It is sad to consider that people in our government have become so corrupt. It’s sad to think that people who’ve sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution are grasping hard to hang on to their power, and would go so far as to kill the man who would interrupt their progress in dismantling America.
Changes are needed. The halls of government need to be cleaned. Is it possible? Perhaps. But only with the help of Almighty God. My sources who have been deep in the trenches of D.C. tell me that what we call the Deep State is broader and deeper than any of us think. I’m not ready to give up on America yet, but I also know we can’t do it alone.
Pray.
Seriously.
Pause and pray.
.
© 2024 Shadowtrail Media, LLC
© 2024 Newsforia, LLC
Daniel Bobinski, Th.D., is an international bestselling author, a certified behavioral analyst, and for 35 years he’s been a corporate trainer and executive coach. In 2019, before the dreaded virus, he began writing for UncoverDC and RedState. He now hosts his own TV show, Keep the Republic, and does a podcast with Ambassador Alan Keyes, called “After Hours with Bobinski and Keyes.”
Sound analysis of crack boom times indicates three shooters at least, first two shots (timed to approximate 500 yards) are not included on the graph shown, but are very obviously heard on the news video of the bullet whizzing past his ear. Followed by the 5+ with simultaneous crack booms from about 150 yards. Followed by one, or two from about 300 yards, and the final crack bang on the graph that looks like a 7mm mag, ( std USSS caliber) from 400ish yards away.
What a waste of 20 minutes. And the guy’s a PhD? Surely he would have learned what I did in my doctoral program about making a PowerPoint presentation: you have all the detail in the PowerPoint and your voiceover consists of nothing but reading aloud the text of the PowerPoint slides. Why? So you won’t be making the audience try to follow two separate inputs of information. You can, at certain points, pause on a slide without text and summarize.
But why was the 20 minutes mostly a waste of time?
Here’s why.
Because it was all obvious from the recording replayed within minutes of the event.
I heard the initial shots followed by a gaggle of other shots I took at the time to have been return fire from Secret Service.
Why? Because they were obviously different guns.
But after we finally learned that the shooter was taken out by a single head shot fired into a 9” target window by a Secret Service counter-sniper who had had the guy in his sights for at least three minutes before the initial shots were fired, it was obvious the shooter couldn’t have moved but a few inches from his original spot.
So, so much for anyone claiming the second bunch of shots sounded different because the assassitard had moved to a different location.
Meaning?
They sounded different because they were FROM a different location and since the assassitard died in his original location, then the other shots were being fired from other locations.
And since there was only a single shot fired by the Secret Service counter-sniper, it means that other people were firing.
And who were those other people?
Local Barney Fifes firing at anything that moved?
Not likely because of one important thing:
The last shot fired was the Secret Service counter-sniper killing the assassitard.
Meaning?
That whoever was firing the other guns stopped as soon as the assassitard was down.
Meaning?
Most likely that the assassitard was being surveilled by someone working with the other shooters who gave the word to cease firing and clear out once the obvious target was down.
Who could those folks have been?
Well, consider that, in spite of the federal government claiming that they had discovered Trump to be the object of an Iranian assassination plot, they sent out a deliberately understaffed security team, ostensibly Secret Service but later discovered to have had relatively few Secret Service personnel, the rest being a hastily-assembled and disparate group of loans from other federal agencies and chicks in sunglasses and suits, most of whom clearly didn’t know what the fuck they were doing.
That should provide a significant clue about the identity of the other shooters who used the assassitard as cover for what they intended to do during the very short window they had until he was shot dead.
When you have two or more highly unusual things connected to a single event, then the likelihood is high that those things had a connection other than being mere attendant circumstances to that event.
And the greater the number of unusual things, then the higher the likelihood that they were not taking place merely by chance but by coordination.
Was it true that that counter-sniper said he had been ordered by the head of the Secret Service not to shoot?
Their rules of engagement are to take out the threat as soon as he’s obviously a threat. So orders from the head of the Secret Service over a three minute period not to follow established procedure is a highly unusual thing.
So ask yourself, what would have been prevented by the Secret Service counter-sniper killing the assassitard as soon as he saw him with a rifle pointed in the direction of the stage?
Well, obviously, it would have prevented the assassitard from shooting.
But it also would have removed the cover of chaos and confusion caused by the assassitard for the other shooters to get their shots off.
And since the assassitard had been spotted on the ground with a rangefinder early on, provoking calls over the secure channel; since he had been spotted on the roof with a rifle by a bunch of civilians at least a half hour before the shooting and then by a local cop who had been boosted up by another cop to see the shooter and THEY had called it in on the secure channel, then how was it that Trump was ever allowed to leave his secure holding area until the threat had been isolated and neutralized?
All of those are significantly hugely weird things.
It gives every appearance of events being managed and juked around until everything was in place for Trump to be deliberately sent out into a kill box.