Let us whittle down some scenarios… It was a fake bullet and Trump had a squib The whole thing was staged and Trump was “in on it”, faking the blood with a judiciously-squeezed squib. However, in this case, how did bystanders get injured and killed? (Or didn’t they?) Obviously, this is the stupidest and least plausible scenario.
"how did bystanders get injured and killed? (Or didn’t they?) Obviously, this is the stupidest and least plausible scenario."
Unless we get an independent credible autopsy report (not FBI autopsy) showing the bystander was killed by an AR15 bullet , the most plausible conclusion would be that it was all staged.
We definitely lived through a moment where history stood on the edge of a knife. What I find most interesting about this whole mess is that, beat-for-beat, the United States republic has very much resembled the Roman republic. Similar problems at similar times. If you trace Roman history, Trump is a figure that very much resembles the Gracchi brothers:
-A surplus of [slave] labor drove down Roman incomes and damaged the middle class
-The poor were forced to sell their land to wealthy land-owners
-Cities became havens for a new renter class
-Gracchi brothers elected Tribunes of the plebs on the promise of land [economic] reform
-The attempts by the Gracchi brothers to force through reforms resulted in the ruling elite first framing them as dictators, then attacking them through the legal system, then when that didn't work, simply arranging an assassination.
The interesting part of all this, is that Donald Trump lived... by what can only be called divine intervention, he survived the assassination attempt. This will mean, for the first time in modern history, we're off-script. A massive global Republic that's going through the same stages as we've seen before in history, but this time the reformist faction survives. If Trump lives long enough to take office again, we're going to be in completely uncharted territory from a historical perspective. I'm very excited to see it and really hope that they don't succeed in a future assassination attempt some time between now and next January. We're living through incredible times. I need to write an article on the beat-for-beat reenactment of the Roman Republic -> Roman Empire that we're going through in the US... along with the fact that we are now, some how by the grace of god, spectacularly off-script.
There are a number of videos that have popped up that appear to show numerous members of the crowd indicating the shooter to police at the rally, but they, apparently, did not act. I'm sure many people have watched these clips. Another strange clip that has emerged, is, apparently, of one Janeen Diguiseppi, an FBI employee filming Trump as the shots are being fired. Add to that mix information that this 20 year old allegedly had encrypted overseas media accounts (https://americanmilitarynews.com/2024/07/trump-shooters-alleged-overseas-connections-exposed-by-gop-rep/) and it starts to look as if there may have been deeper machinations afoot.
Either way, I think the establishment would have preferred him dead, as, although he is a committed Zionist with backing from the likes of Miriam Adelson and he is as compromised as the rest of Washington, think his connections to Epstein, he may have made the "globalists" road a little more of a rocky ride than they wanted.
I know I’ve said this before; you can’t be that incompetent by accident! But incompetent people can also be corrupt so it can all easily be a confluence of systemic failures and malicious neglect.
It doesn't have to be so much the deep state as a few rouge elements. Use influence to assign an anti trump secret service employ. Second groom a shooter, neither are particularly hard with the right levers. I'm highly skeptical of the it's all incompetence
Excellent article. I think there might be one other possibility though, but it is a bit more conspiratorial than your conclusion, so I figured I'd just throw it out there for posterity.
The is also the idea that the shooter himself was outright groomed or contacted by someone from the "deep state," likely some FBI operative, and given the money and further motive to do the shooting. From everything I've found about the shooter, he doesn't exactly seem like the sharpest tool in the shed, and while the security was purposefully lax, I think someone would have had to tell him where to go and help him plan it, otherwise he likely would have been caught. He was seen before the shooting in the area with a view finder, something that snipers use to help determine the distance of their shots. Even though I know a fair bit about guns despite not sadly owning any, I didn't even know those were a thing, so I find it unlikely that some bluepilled moron would have the presence of mind to bring one along, let alone know about it.
I think this incident is akin to the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping case, if you've heard of it, where several FBI agents managed to convince a couple unstable people who happened to have right-of-center politics to kidnap the governor of Michigan. By themselves, the culprits had no thoughts to kidnap her, but after enough convincing and given material support by the feds, they tried and were immediately arrested, allowing the government and media to smear the right yet again with a crime the government itself instigated. Someone influenced this guy, someone was whispering in his ear, and should Trump be re-elected, I think we may just find out some fed just "happened to have met" the shooter months prior to the infamous day.
Yes exactly. This is what I was alluding to by "and possibly directly" in the final paragraph - ie. that it's possible they directly goaded him into doing this. It wouldn't exactly be unprecedented (no pun intended).
I would also point out that malice and incompetence are not mutually exclusive: you CAN try to sucker-punch someone and fail, breaking your thumb instead.
A malicious faction could have planned or facilitated the attempt, and been fairly incompetent about it, or less competent than they would have been in decades past; at the very least, considering the footage and testimonies already surfaced, they seem to have been incompetent at dissimulating their malice.
Conversely, just because gross incompetence was on display (the Secret Cervix memes etc) doesn’t mean that there was no malice; indeed, putting the Sassy Service front and center could easily have been a malicious ploy by more competent actors to obfuscate the issue and add plausible deniability.
Have to disagree. Your argument has the same flaw as the systemic racism and glass ceiling claims, namely a failure to identify human agency.
If, despite all the anti-discrimination safeguards, outcomes continue to be unequal in terms of race and sex, and you reject the natural explanation for this, then someone, somewhere, must be making it happen. It must be possible to identify individuals within organisations who make it their business to ensure that racism and sexism fly in under the institutional radar. But equality agitators are incapable of doing this, and their claims deserve to be dismissed as conspiracy theories.
Similarly, if your explanation of the Trump shooting is correct, then someone within the regime must have made a decision to take Trump out, must have persuaded others to agree with that decision, and these people must have proceeded to hatch a plan. A remarkably fallible plan, incidentally, which would rely on a nutjob with a high-powered rifle being in the right place at the right time. If we are prepared to consider this explanation, then perhaps we are being unduly dismissive of the systemic racism/sexism claims.
Your explanation strikes me as less plausible, and less consistent with Ockham’s Razor, than blaming incompetence, complacency, illogicality, and general thoughtlessness.
Far more simply, put a secret service employ that doesn't like trump on duty, separately groom a shooter. Rely on said secret service ignoring said threat due to political bias.
Nah. Not simple at all, very high risk of failure, very high risk of betrayal. I mean, would people like that trust each other? There'd have to be a cell within the Secret Service with an IRA-like level of dedication and preparedness to take any consequences. I can't believe that's the sort of people we're talking about.
I take the point, and it's an interesting one, but the situations are different, in an important way: workplaces are full of white people desperate for coloured people to succeed, whereas the US secret service, the FBI, the media etc. are NOT full of people desperate for Trump to succeed. On the contrary, there are many groups - including the "deep state" or "the swamp" or "the regime" itself - that would benefit from him being assassinated.
Your point about incompetence and general thoughtlessness... there would need to be a lot of that, from multiple people, in order for this to be genuinely a cock-up.
Of course, I could be wrong, and I want to fully acknowledge that. It's not something on which I will stake my reputation (such as it is).
According to the steel-manned argument for the first scenario, only the bullet at Trump would be non-existing. The other shots, both at the ostensible shooter and at the bystanders, are real. None of these would have to be fired from the ostensible shooter.
That's true, but then Trump would have to operate (squeeze) a blood squib on cue, and without being spotted doing so by the spectators behind him. This is certainly possible, but seems unlikely to me.
In addition, there is footage showing a white blur of the bullet going through the air, ostensibly proving that the bullet existed. That footage could be digitally altered.
Deliberate, stubborn credulity and defensive normalcy bias.
Trump is an actor. His job is, and always has been, to follow a script. At this point, the script is so lazy, laughable, and transparent, that one has to be emotionally motivated to suspend disbelief about it.
It's interesting seeing the "white nationalist" wing of the online Commentariat regress into passive gullibility now, even after managing to discern the full-spectrum, unified, disciplined control of the media during the Scamdemic. You, Morgoth, and Devon Stack have all seemingly dialed back in to the Signal, with somewhat surprising certitude. My only explanation for that is that your particular school of dissidents continues desperately to cling to the belief that there is "hope" or "a chance to win" or other such cherished beliefs. Once one recognizes that the Herd of Humanity--including racial Europeans--is being scientifically managed by a meticulously engineered audio-video matrix, one has to dispense once and for all with the precious delusion of agency.
Those who harbor such abiding love and admiration for the European race as you three are going to be hard-pressed to accept that your people have been nothing but livestock, cat's paws, and golems for going on 1,700 years.
But those of us of a bleaker bent easily saw the Rocky-poster announcement of Trump's assassination attempt and understood exactly what buttons were being pressed by the Machine on the squirming biomass of the fleshpoid Herd.
We’re all cautious buyers this time around but I see it as a simple wager. If Trump isn’t an ‘actor’ then clearly he js preferable to the alternative. If he is an actor, I don’t see what we lose be supporting him because the deception will become apparent soon enough.
I believe it has emerged that there were likely other shooters besides Crooks, and that Crooks was likely groomed and manipulated (perhaps MK-Ultra'd) to play the role of "fall guy/patsy"
Or more simply the elite aren't an amorphous blob that all think exactly the same and that this was a rogue element that conducted this. Ie the academic agent take which is by far the most likely.
Silly, unnecessary, and unsupportable conjecture and whole-cloth conspiracy theory. How does this nebulous "rogue element" interface with the Secret Service, or with the slavishly conformist Media, or with the consensually designated "shooter" Mr. "Crooks"?
Muddled, befuddled midwits like "Academic Agent" are primarily motivated by the expediency of maintaining a discursive space that enables them to pontificate endlessly and aimlessly on the grand drama transpiring in their big, big, internet-grifter brains. This objective requires them to selectively credit a haphazard subset of Establishment narrative points, which is merely the "raw material" for their extrapolated "analysis." They extrapolate from a deliberately curated subset of narrative points to fabricate elaborate crank theories, entirely of their own imagination, attributing phenomena willy-nilly to unnamed, shadowy, woolly nonspecific, undefined entities like "The Elite" and "The Left" and other such drivel. They then pit these imaginary hobgoblins against adversaries and rivals that are also equally imaginary, and also unnamed.
AA simply clings to his market share of the dissident Commentariat by staying dialed into the Signal to a carefully limited degree, making sure that all new data he espouses are consistent with his preexisting hobby-horse "theses." This might be the "Spenglerian Cyclical Model of History" or other such woolly constructs. Whatever it is, it's gotta be safe for YouTube!
Online commentators' bread and butter is Byzantine, interminable, but ultimately noncommittal "analysis," and nothing scares them more than a simple, straightforward observational method of epistomology. Whereas AA tortures inductive reasoning with convoluted "Elite Analysis," one need only step back for a moment to realize: It's Just a Television Show.
You're extremely overcomplicating it. They protect them in the media as the media saying what actually happened would be assumed to be the Left in general as thats the type of thinking that they have been trying to create about the right.
What exactly about the scamdemic proved to you that the media has enough unified control that they’d be able to pull off something like *this*?
The way you’re describing the situation makes their level of control over the details of our lives sound about a step-and-half short of that of the Matrix.
There exist only two possibilities: either there exist observable phenomena (or at least, overwhelming evidence suggesting the likelihood of such phenomena) in our daily lives that can *ONLY* be explained by the existence of such absolute control by the media, in which case it must be believed no matter how unlikely…
Or possibility two, which is that there is no such evidence, therefore your claims of absolute media dominance over how the average person perceives reality must be dismissed out of hand as unlikely beyond belief, with many explanations both simpler and more straightforward existing for all the crazy things that have taken place in our country recently, from the wuhan “plague” to the Trump shooting, and everything else.
This clumsy little episode is kid’s stuff compared to the full-spectrum hoax of the scamdemic, where the masses were literally convinced that they were in the midst of a “deadly pandemic,” even though no such thing was happening. This is just a manipulative photo shoot. Not impressive in the least, comparatively.
If I may provide further steelmanning, either such a squib or something like a knife may have been used by either him or the agents covering him while he was down behind the Podium.
I doubt he was "bladed" specifically because the "blood" isn't even convincing. None of the color, pattern, or stasis of the "blood" suggests organic exsanguination from the ear.
I doubt that as well and have the same impression. But I wanted to point out that this scenario does not strictly depend on a fake blood hypothesis, but is basically equally compatible with a deliberate cut/puncture. In other words, a broader base of assumptions is compatible with it.
As a plan, it doesn't seem very certain of success. They would be counting on there being somebody willing to to do the deed and do it within the necessary time frame (and that they be competent enough to complete the task), and it would require that numerous law enforcement officers don't step in and prevent it.
It would be interesting to look back at other recent events where Trump was speaking to see if any obvious sniper positions were left unguarded.
First, the plan doesn't need to be certain of success. A good chance is enough, especially if repeated at multiple events.
The other things you mention were all checked off: there WAS somebody willing to do the deed, and he WAS competent enough to complete the task (Trump's head turn is all that saved him), and numerous law enforcement officers DIDN'T step in to prevent it - they didn't investigate reports of a suspicious guy with a rangefinder, they "lost track" of him, and then the order to fire on him was withheld until he had fired at Trump, etc. It was a whole set of "mistakes" that enabled that bullet to get as close as it did to Trump's brain.
Your final point is one I had thought of but forgot to add: for all we know, all of Trump's events have had security "mistakes" like this, but this event was the first one where some lone wolf took a chance.
MKU-ed is an option for this kid... but you'd think they'd get some one who was a better shot if that were the case. I think that they're kinda up shit creek. Trumps enemies don't have enough power because of the divided nature of the federal government. They're incredibly angry, but half of them are DEI hires and not competent to actually act in the same way that an organization like MI6 once could. Competency crisis, meet government crisis.
yes it was real. The dead man's family will tell us that
"how did bystanders get injured and killed? (Or didn’t they?) Obviously, this is the stupidest and least plausible scenario."
Unless we get an independent credible autopsy report (not FBI autopsy) showing the bystander was killed by an AR15 bullet , the most plausible conclusion would be that it was all staged.
That makes no sense. It is highly implausible that this was staged.
We definitely lived through a moment where history stood on the edge of a knife. What I find most interesting about this whole mess is that, beat-for-beat, the United States republic has very much resembled the Roman republic. Similar problems at similar times. If you trace Roman history, Trump is a figure that very much resembles the Gracchi brothers:
-A surplus of [slave] labor drove down Roman incomes and damaged the middle class
-The poor were forced to sell their land to wealthy land-owners
-Cities became havens for a new renter class
-Gracchi brothers elected Tribunes of the plebs on the promise of land [economic] reform
-The attempts by the Gracchi brothers to force through reforms resulted in the ruling elite first framing them as dictators, then attacking them through the legal system, then when that didn't work, simply arranging an assassination.
The interesting part of all this, is that Donald Trump lived... by what can only be called divine intervention, he survived the assassination attempt. This will mean, for the first time in modern history, we're off-script. A massive global Republic that's going through the same stages as we've seen before in history, but this time the reformist faction survives. If Trump lives long enough to take office again, we're going to be in completely uncharted territory from a historical perspective. I'm very excited to see it and really hope that they don't succeed in a future assassination attempt some time between now and next January. We're living through incredible times. I need to write an article on the beat-for-beat reenactment of the Roman Republic -> Roman Empire that we're going through in the US... along with the fact that we are now, some how by the grace of god, spectacularly off-script.
There are a number of videos that have popped up that appear to show numerous members of the crowd indicating the shooter to police at the rally, but they, apparently, did not act. I'm sure many people have watched these clips. Another strange clip that has emerged, is, apparently, of one Janeen Diguiseppi, an FBI employee filming Trump as the shots are being fired. Add to that mix information that this 20 year old allegedly had encrypted overseas media accounts (https://americanmilitarynews.com/2024/07/trump-shooters-alleged-overseas-connections-exposed-by-gop-rep/) and it starts to look as if there may have been deeper machinations afoot.
Either way, I think the establishment would have preferred him dead, as, although he is a committed Zionist with backing from the likes of Miriam Adelson and he is as compromised as the rest of Washington, think his connections to Epstein, he may have made the "globalists" road a little more of a rocky ride than they wanted.
I know I’ve said this before; you can’t be that incompetent by accident! But incompetent people can also be corrupt so it can all easily be a confluence of systemic failures and malicious neglect.
Idk, man
I think there really is a competency crisis.
Thinking that the “deep state” had anything to do with the shooting/shooter is giving them way too much credit. These people are morons.
Perhaps I’m wrong, but I don’t think so.
It doesn't have to be so much the deep state as a few rouge elements. Use influence to assign an anti trump secret service employ. Second groom a shooter, neither are particularly hard with the right levers. I'm highly skeptical of the it's all incompetence
Excellent article. I think there might be one other possibility though, but it is a bit more conspiratorial than your conclusion, so I figured I'd just throw it out there for posterity.
The is also the idea that the shooter himself was outright groomed or contacted by someone from the "deep state," likely some FBI operative, and given the money and further motive to do the shooting. From everything I've found about the shooter, he doesn't exactly seem like the sharpest tool in the shed, and while the security was purposefully lax, I think someone would have had to tell him where to go and help him plan it, otherwise he likely would have been caught. He was seen before the shooting in the area with a view finder, something that snipers use to help determine the distance of their shots. Even though I know a fair bit about guns despite not sadly owning any, I didn't even know those were a thing, so I find it unlikely that some bluepilled moron would have the presence of mind to bring one along, let alone know about it.
I think this incident is akin to the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping case, if you've heard of it, where several FBI agents managed to convince a couple unstable people who happened to have right-of-center politics to kidnap the governor of Michigan. By themselves, the culprits had no thoughts to kidnap her, but after enough convincing and given material support by the feds, they tried and were immediately arrested, allowing the government and media to smear the right yet again with a crime the government itself instigated. Someone influenced this guy, someone was whispering in his ear, and should Trump be re-elected, I think we may just find out some fed just "happened to have met" the shooter months prior to the infamous day.
Range finders are quite common and have been around quite some time. Used in golf as well.
Yes exactly. This is what I was alluding to by "and possibly directly" in the final paragraph - ie. that it's possible they directly goaded him into doing this. It wouldn't exactly be unprecedented (no pun intended).
I would also point out that malice and incompetence are not mutually exclusive: you CAN try to sucker-punch someone and fail, breaking your thumb instead.
A malicious faction could have planned or facilitated the attempt, and been fairly incompetent about it, or less competent than they would have been in decades past; at the very least, considering the footage and testimonies already surfaced, they seem to have been incompetent at dissimulating their malice.
Conversely, just because gross incompetence was on display (the Secret Cervix memes etc) doesn’t mean that there was no malice; indeed, putting the Sassy Service front and center could easily have been a malicious ploy by more competent actors to obfuscate the issue and add plausible deniability.
"Will no one rid me of this turbulent threat to democracy?"
Have to disagree. Your argument has the same flaw as the systemic racism and glass ceiling claims, namely a failure to identify human agency.
If, despite all the anti-discrimination safeguards, outcomes continue to be unequal in terms of race and sex, and you reject the natural explanation for this, then someone, somewhere, must be making it happen. It must be possible to identify individuals within organisations who make it their business to ensure that racism and sexism fly in under the institutional radar. But equality agitators are incapable of doing this, and their claims deserve to be dismissed as conspiracy theories.
Similarly, if your explanation of the Trump shooting is correct, then someone within the regime must have made a decision to take Trump out, must have persuaded others to agree with that decision, and these people must have proceeded to hatch a plan. A remarkably fallible plan, incidentally, which would rely on a nutjob with a high-powered rifle being in the right place at the right time. If we are prepared to consider this explanation, then perhaps we are being unduly dismissive of the systemic racism/sexism claims.
Your explanation strikes me as less plausible, and less consistent with Ockham’s Razor, than blaming incompetence, complacency, illogicality, and general thoughtlessness.
Far more simply, put a secret service employ that doesn't like trump on duty, separately groom a shooter. Rely on said secret service ignoring said threat due to political bias.
Nah. Not simple at all, very high risk of failure, very high risk of betrayal. I mean, would people like that trust each other? There'd have to be a cell within the Secret Service with an IRA-like level of dedication and preparedness to take any consequences. I can't believe that's the sort of people we're talking about.
Have a backup shooter incase he misses
I take the point, and it's an interesting one, but the situations are different, in an important way: workplaces are full of white people desperate for coloured people to succeed, whereas the US secret service, the FBI, the media etc. are NOT full of people desperate for Trump to succeed. On the contrary, there are many groups - including the "deep state" or "the swamp" or "the regime" itself - that would benefit from him being assassinated.
Your point about incompetence and general thoughtlessness... there would need to be a lot of that, from multiple people, in order for this to be genuinely a cock-up.
Of course, I could be wrong, and I want to fully acknowledge that. It's not something on which I will stake my reputation (such as it is).
According to the steel-manned argument for the first scenario, only the bullet at Trump would be non-existing. The other shots, both at the ostensible shooter and at the bystanders, are real. None of these would have to be fired from the ostensible shooter.
That's true, but then Trump would have to operate (squeeze) a blood squib on cue, and without being spotted doing so by the spectators behind him. This is certainly possible, but seems unlikely to me.
In addition, there is footage showing a white blur of the bullet going through the air, ostensibly proving that the bullet existed. That footage could be digitally altered.
"seems unlikely to me'
Deliberate, stubborn credulity and defensive normalcy bias.
Trump is an actor. His job is, and always has been, to follow a script. At this point, the script is so lazy, laughable, and transparent, that one has to be emotionally motivated to suspend disbelief about it.
It's interesting seeing the "white nationalist" wing of the online Commentariat regress into passive gullibility now, even after managing to discern the full-spectrum, unified, disciplined control of the media during the Scamdemic. You, Morgoth, and Devon Stack have all seemingly dialed back in to the Signal, with somewhat surprising certitude. My only explanation for that is that your particular school of dissidents continues desperately to cling to the belief that there is "hope" or "a chance to win" or other such cherished beliefs. Once one recognizes that the Herd of Humanity--including racial Europeans--is being scientifically managed by a meticulously engineered audio-video matrix, one has to dispense once and for all with the precious delusion of agency.
Those who harbor such abiding love and admiration for the European race as you three are going to be hard-pressed to accept that your people have been nothing but livestock, cat's paws, and golems for going on 1,700 years.
But those of us of a bleaker bent easily saw the Rocky-poster announcement of Trump's assassination attempt and understood exactly what buttons were being pressed by the Machine on the squirming biomass of the fleshpoid Herd.
We’re all cautious buyers this time around but I see it as a simple wager. If Trump isn’t an ‘actor’ then clearly he js preferable to the alternative. If he is an actor, I don’t see what we lose be supporting him because the deception will become apparent soon enough.
“Cautious buyers”?
If you’re even in the market for what the TeeVee is trying to sell you, you’ve already been hoodwinked.
You didn’t even address my simple point.
I believe it has emerged that there were likely other shooters besides Crooks, and that Crooks was likely groomed and manipulated (perhaps MK-Ultra'd) to play the role of "fall guy/patsy"
Or more simply the elite aren't an amorphous blob that all think exactly the same and that this was a rogue element that conducted this. Ie the academic agent take which is by far the most likely.
Silly, unnecessary, and unsupportable conjecture and whole-cloth conspiracy theory. How does this nebulous "rogue element" interface with the Secret Service, or with the slavishly conformist Media, or with the consensually designated "shooter" Mr. "Crooks"?
Muddled, befuddled midwits like "Academic Agent" are primarily motivated by the expediency of maintaining a discursive space that enables them to pontificate endlessly and aimlessly on the grand drama transpiring in their big, big, internet-grifter brains. This objective requires them to selectively credit a haphazard subset of Establishment narrative points, which is merely the "raw material" for their extrapolated "analysis." They extrapolate from a deliberately curated subset of narrative points to fabricate elaborate crank theories, entirely of their own imagination, attributing phenomena willy-nilly to unnamed, shadowy, woolly nonspecific, undefined entities like "The Elite" and "The Left" and other such drivel. They then pit these imaginary hobgoblins against adversaries and rivals that are also equally imaginary, and also unnamed.
AA simply clings to his market share of the dissident Commentariat by staying dialed into the Signal to a carefully limited degree, making sure that all new data he espouses are consistent with his preexisting hobby-horse "theses." This might be the "Spenglerian Cyclical Model of History" or other such woolly constructs. Whatever it is, it's gotta be safe for YouTube!
Online commentators' bread and butter is Byzantine, interminable, but ultimately noncommittal "analysis," and nothing scares them more than a simple, straightforward observational method of epistomology. Whereas AA tortures inductive reasoning with convoluted "Elite Analysis," one need only step back for a moment to realize: It's Just a Television Show.
You're extremely overcomplicating it. They protect them in the media as the media saying what actually happened would be assumed to be the Left in general as thats the type of thinking that they have been trying to create about the right.
I think you need some time away from the internet
What exactly about the scamdemic proved to you that the media has enough unified control that they’d be able to pull off something like *this*?
The way you’re describing the situation makes their level of control over the details of our lives sound about a step-and-half short of that of the Matrix.
There exist only two possibilities: either there exist observable phenomena (or at least, overwhelming evidence suggesting the likelihood of such phenomena) in our daily lives that can *ONLY* be explained by the existence of such absolute control by the media, in which case it must be believed no matter how unlikely…
Or possibility two, which is that there is no such evidence, therefore your claims of absolute media dominance over how the average person perceives reality must be dismissed out of hand as unlikely beyond belief, with many explanations both simpler and more straightforward existing for all the crazy things that have taken place in our country recently, from the wuhan “plague” to the Trump shooting, and everything else.
This clumsy little episode is kid’s stuff compared to the full-spectrum hoax of the scamdemic, where the masses were literally convinced that they were in the midst of a “deadly pandemic,” even though no such thing was happening. This is just a manipulative photo shoot. Not impressive in the least, comparatively.
If I may provide further steelmanning, either such a squib or something like a knife may have been used by either him or the agents covering him while he was down behind the Podium.
I doubt he was "bladed" specifically because the "blood" isn't even convincing. None of the color, pattern, or stasis of the "blood" suggests organic exsanguination from the ear.
I doubt that as well and have the same impression. But I wanted to point out that this scenario does not strictly depend on a fake blood hypothesis, but is basically equally compatible with a deliberate cut/puncture. In other words, a broader base of assumptions is compatible with it.
Totally fair.
As a plan, it doesn't seem very certain of success. They would be counting on there being somebody willing to to do the deed and do it within the necessary time frame (and that they be competent enough to complete the task), and it would require that numerous law enforcement officers don't step in and prevent it.
It would be interesting to look back at other recent events where Trump was speaking to see if any obvious sniper positions were left unguarded.
First, the plan doesn't need to be certain of success. A good chance is enough, especially if repeated at multiple events.
The other things you mention were all checked off: there WAS somebody willing to do the deed, and he WAS competent enough to complete the task (Trump's head turn is all that saved him), and numerous law enforcement officers DIDN'T step in to prevent it - they didn't investigate reports of a suspicious guy with a rangefinder, they "lost track" of him, and then the order to fire on him was withheld until he had fired at Trump, etc. It was a whole set of "mistakes" that enabled that bullet to get as close as it did to Trump's brain.
Your final point is one I had thought of but forgot to add: for all we know, all of Trump's events have had security "mistakes" like this, but this event was the first one where some lone wolf took a chance.
MKU-ed is an option for this kid... but you'd think they'd get some one who was a better shot if that were the case. I think that they're kinda up shit creek. Trumps enemies don't have enough power because of the divided nature of the federal government. They're incredibly angry, but half of them are DEI hires and not competent to actually act in the same way that an organization like MI6 once could. Competency crisis, meet government crisis.
Nice story, could do with more car chases though.
If you are serious then you are an idiot. If this is satire, it is not clever or original in any way and you are just wasting everybody's time.