These guys obviously knew what was up. Force to reveal their deep-state contacts. Waterboard these motherfuckers until they talk.
>>474945481
>>474945481>this is a real picture of a bullet, and not a doctored photograph>the con is they knew how to photograph a point blank miss with a rifle>the shooting was a real thing
>>474946248A Cohen-cidence
looking at it from another angle here msm purposefully try and pick out ridiculously unflattering photos of people to push, this could be a means to get that extra over the top contorted look
>>474945481>Waterboard these motherfuckersI agree we should waterboard trump until he exposes his zionist agenda.
>>474945481>>474946248This is like that mortician who performed all the convenient autopsies.
>>474945481>These guys obviously knew what was up./p/tard here. It actually is obvious. Nobody in their right mind would be using a 1/8000 shutter speed for that shot unless they expected to catch a REALLY fast moving object. Just to counter how dark the photo would become at that speed, they would have had to crank up the ISO which results in that matte effect you see on the sky in the background. Whoever took that shot knew what was coming.
>>474946248No fucking way, is that real?
>>474947653>Whoever took that shot knew what was coming.Same guy who photographed Bush in the classroom when 9/11 was happening, so of course h33 did.
>>474945481people watching the shooter say the story about the him turning his rifle on a cop climbing the roof never happened.a weird lie to fabricate when there were so many witnesses observing the shooter.
>>474947653or their steadiness is shit
>>474948113>"I ran there even though people were yelling to get down and all of the, you know, the president's staff were yelling to get down, Secret Service were yelling at us to get down," he said.>"And I, you know, I was tone deaf to it. It wasn't very smart on my part, but I was just trying to do my job, which was really to, you know, to cover the president."lmao
>>474945481I think this photo was supposed to show trumps head exploding. How the he'll could he have timed that shot? The camera must have been set to automatically shoot at the sound of gun shots.
>>474948368Just photoshop it
>>474948176>a weird lie to fabricate when there were so many witnesses observing the shooter.A lie becomes truth if enough people repeat it.Most people hear that story once and say to themselves "Oh, that explains that..." and never think about it again. Think about taking a trip to Wal-Mart. 75% of america is as smart and incisive as the people you see there.People are dumb as fuck, most of them more stupid than you can imagine.
>>474945481The sign is a subtle joke. The shop is called "Sneed's Feed & Seed", where "feed" and "seed" both end in the sound "-eed", thus rhyming with the name of the owner, Sneed. The sign says that the shop was "Formerly Chuck's", implying that the two words beginning with "F" and "S" would have ended with "-uck", rhyming with "Chuck". So, when Chuck owned the shop, it would have been called "Chuck's Feeduck and Seeduck".
>>474946641Why w3as the photographer Doug Mills there that day? Why was he shooting at 1/8000?
>>474948857>A LIE BECOMES TRUTH IF ENOUGH PEOPLE REPEAT ITSO YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT MEN CAN BECOME WOMEN
>>474952455Political photographers photograph politicians.He was shooting at 1/8000 because that's a reasonable speed to shoot in bright daylight with iso 100 and a low f-stop. If he shot at 1/200 for example shit would be a big white blur.
>>474945481>everyone wants crisp ultra high def photos that can capture a single pore on your nose in 8k from 20 miles a way in a candid shot to be used for campaign or media purposes. Gee I wonder why they have such great shots after taking 6,000 stills a second mama Mia! It’s a heckin conspiracy!
>>474954115Yes everything is always so conveniently explained. What is increasingly clear is that many people knew what was about to happen.
>>474945481high res
>>474947653There was a lady in the crowd behind Trump wearing a black hat that looked sus too. She even looked in the direction of the shooter, pulled out her phone right before the first shot, and then smiled when it happened. This whole thing was a fucking inside job by the dems, SS, etc.
>>474945481>>474954459high res with zoomer circle
That’s just a bird
>>474946248oh my god its the same professional political photographer, schizo brain activate neuron pathways!
>>474954465her being an FBI agent was debunked early on. the fbi agent chick is way fatter now. girl was looking at the chart that trump was looking at. her reaction is sus though.
>>474945481Fake. it's all fake.
>>474945481there was also that pulitzer prize winning woman photographer there, who took the photo of him on the ground. Doug mills could just be a boomer who is always at presidential events but why was that woman there?
>>474948857>People are dumb as fuck, most of them more stupid than you can imagine.Just go on normie sites like facebook and nextdoor (especially) and you will see how retarded most people are. They can't even form coherent sentences anymore.
>>474954436You can punch the numbers into an exposure calculator yourself, it's pretty standard photography stuff if you've ever used something other than a phone to take a picture.
>>474945481>>474946248Most probably a photoshop.
>>474945481>obviously knew what was upnot necessarily trueowner: bossman. send your best photog with best equipment to the rally. and i expect great picsbossman: photog, go to trump rally. take the GOOD camera and i expect great picsphotog: sure thingthe idea is to send people out to do your bidding while maintaining arms distance and plausible deniability
>>474946886>exposes his zionist agenda.thats not a secret
>>474954115>that's a reasonable speed to shoot in bright daylight with iso 100 and a low f-stop>>474947653> Nobody in their right mind would be using a 1/8000 shutter speed for that shot unless they expected to catch a REALLY fast moving object. we seem to have a difference of opinion
>>474952455Add this to the list of unanswerable questions. Shills big mad over you pointing this out. Also, 1/8000 is absolutely NOT a normal shutter speed to be using due to lighting or "shakiness" of a camera most likely mounted on a tripod. Try again. OP is on to something here and the shill response proves it.
>>474956356ITT a bunch or nocameraz who think 1/8000 is some crazy speed to shoot with. It's not, shrimple as.
>>474956725I'll repost my comment from the last time this came upIf you're recording at 30fps, each frame is 1/30th of a second. But if you leave the shutter open the entire time (360 degree shutter angle), the video will look really blurry - and you're also letting a ton of light in which will overload most cameras with outdoor lighting.It's "standard" for movies and TV to be shot with a 180 degree shutter angle (IE, 1/60th of a second for 30 fps) which lets in light half the time. This provides the "normal" motion blur we're used to.However, this still lets a ton of light into the camera, especially outdoors.You can deal with this in 3 ways: 1) "neutral density" filters which are fogged glass that reduce the amount of light let in, 2) reduce the size of the iris (increase the F/stop) to let less light in, or 3) decrease the time the shutter is open (smaller shutter angle).Cell phone cameras and go-pros do not even have adjustable F/stops, so this isn't even always an option. However, professional cameras do. The problem is, a higher F/stop (smaller iris) increases the area that's in focus because optics are complicated. So if you're trying to make Trump stand out from the crowd behind him, you want to keep your Iris wide open (low F/stop). This looks better but lets in a ton of light. So you have to go to option 1 or 3 to get the right exposure.Option 3 increasing the shutter speed, is the easiest to do. When there's a ton of motion, this can make the video look "choppy", but it really isn't a problem in low motion environments.But the reason why it makes motion look choppy is why it'd actually be TERRIBLE for catching a bullet in motion.When your shutter speed is 1/8000 of a second for 30fps, this means that for each frame of video, 99% of the time the shutter is CLOSED and not capturing light. It's only at the last 8000th of a second the shutter opens, and lets in some light. So, the chance of the shutter being open when the bullet went by was under 1%
>>474956961>>474956725>>474947653comments?photog expecting trump to suddenly leap into the sky with a single bound?
>>474956725You'd use a fast shutter if there was any worry of shaking, since you're going to get less blur than a slow shutter. Really though, it's pretty rare to worry much about the shutter speed, you just go with whatever is appropriate for the aperture you want and the lighting conditions.
>>474957670>you just go with whatever is appropriate for the aperture you want and the lighting conditions.I was under the impression this image came from a 30fps video. If it's just a single still photograph, you're absolutely correct. Especially if you want a low f/stop in the middle of the day.
>>474956725But even if he knew, it’s still takes a huge amount of luck to catch a bullet in a picture.It’s literally just a photographer who follows Donald Trump everywhere, and has been working for the white house for 20 years. He’s just capturing the moment.Today with AI is even easier to add a flying bullet if somebody wanted to.
>>474957628Again, you have to balance the lighting conditions, aperture, and shutter speed else you'll btfo your photo. It'll be a blurry white mess. The photographer couldn't pick the lighting conditions and wanted a low aperture because that makes the subject stand out.
>>474957855If it was a 30fps video then he wasn't shooting at 8000fps.
it's not vapour trail, it's photoshopped, do the calculations for yourself for a .223 at 150m with 1/8000 lmao, wait for the 1pbtid faggots to come
>>474958002See my post here. >>474957248FPS and shutter speed are not the same thing. If you're recording at 30 fps, you can have any shutter speed you want as long as it's faster than 1/30th of a second.The ratio between shutter speed and framer rate is called shutter angle because the shutter used to be a spinning disk (so 180 degrees meant half open, half closed).
>>474945481>interrogate these photographersWith who, the FBI? Nigger the FBI are the ones who orchestrated the assassination attempt in the first place.>we have investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrongGod this board has gotten dumb as fuck in recent years.
>>474957628No dude. F/2.0 gives a shallow depth of field for capturing subjects and a low ISO is best for day photography, something around 100 to 200. Then you just leave the shutter speed on auto for the camera to choose.Taking in account the sunny 16 rule you have 1/100 for 100 ISO. If we want f/2.0 we have to scale down 6 stops, so from 1/100 to 1/8000. Which is the right exposure.
>>474947653this argument is a psyop to distract from the 1/8000 distance the trail left, dont fall for it
>>474958155We can argue that the bullet hit his ear slowing it down. But also why is the trajectory straight? Should the bullet change trajectory after it hits something?
>>474958389you can't argue shit retard, the trail left indicates the bullet is travelling faster than any gun could shoot even snipers. its 100% photoshopped and can be proven mathematically
>>474954355But he was taking the 800 photos from a single button press at the exact moment and not taking a pause between photo spams.He's not taking 8000 photos a second for the entire two hour rally.
>>474947653Bro if you're shooting wide open shutter speed requirements in bright light will be above 1/4000th. My camera meters like 1/6000th when I'm using f1.4
>>474958460We don’t know the settings of the camera. I would say it’s easier to capture a slow bullet than a fast bullet.
>>474958688what the fuck are you on about cunt? the metadata has been released for days......... where do you think i got the data for calculating? oh yeah i just made up 1/8000 lmao go fuck off shill
>>474945481It was like the worlds largest mosquito dood.
>>474958688this guy took over 4000 photos and set up the shot to capture the bullet and could barely, and thats at 1/32000, use ur brain bro
>>474954459that trail was a second shot, the first cut Trump's ear because his hand is already reacting
2800 fps/8000 = .35 fps X12 = 4.2 inchesmaths?
>>474959146https://www.peterrussellphotography.com/nk1/nk12.html
>>474959146slower shutter speed makes it easier to capture the bullet, but since the shutter is open longer, the bullet travels more distance and looks like a line. Exactly like we see in the Trump photo. Faster shutter speed is only relevant if you match it with a high frame rate ("slow motion" cameras that shoot at 32,000 fps, for example).
>>474959588and? the point is that it's fucking impossible to casually capture the bullet in the air even at 1/8000....He setup the shot perfect and went from 1/500 all the way to 1/32000 and didnt really get shit
>>474959741Yeah I wasn't arguing with you. Just explaining that the numbers mentioned check out with what we see in the Trump photo.
>>474945481It would be suspicious if he wasn't a photographer whose job is almost exclusively to take pictures of the presidents https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/26/doug-mills-iconic-president-photos-226744/
>>474959828and does the trail length left by the bullet check out at 1/8000? i'll wait
>>474945481There were no photographers, anon.
>>474954436>everything is always so conveniently explained.yes, because it's the real world where things follow logic. stupid nigger.
>>474959828since you fucked off, i'll go ahead and just say a 5.56 (faster than .223) would travel around 4 inches at 1/8000, remind me now, how long does the trail look in doug's photo?
>>474954459Wow his hands really are tiny.
>>474954465Yah>>474954650You're right snopes debunked it
>>474960061If you compare the length of the bullet here>>474959146 (1/32000)vs here>>474945481 (1/8000) it's almost exactly 4x longer. So yeah, seems about right. He was using 55 grain bullets, which travel faster than other loads (62 grain, etc.) - and cheap ammo can vary between rounds. So yeah it all seems reasonable to me. It was just a lucky shot, if you will.
>>474962024ur the dumbest cunt in the world thread, give me your calculations mathematically for how the length should be for a .223 at 150m with 1/8000, i know you won't, so this thread dies with this post
>>474962398https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56×45mm_NATO(55 gr): (3,260 ft/s)3260 / 8000 = 0.4 feet in 1/8000 of a second0.4 feet = 4.89 inchesshit, you're right, it's too long for 1/8000.
>>474963030thank you, i apologise for being toxic, ive been arguing with people over this for days and no one takes me seriously
>>474963285It's all good. The image was good enough to pass the "gut check", but as soon as you said "do the math", I started thinking about "feet per second" and went "oh shit". So either 1) the exif data is fake, or 2) the bullet is photoshopped. Either way that photo isn't 1/8000
I'm no longer interested in the truth. how's them apples?https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Iqh-PNwNns
>>474963548exif data checks out for f1.6 and 1/8000, it's perfectly normal for a photographer to shoot that fast depending on his aperture and iso.I believe it's photoshopped, there seems to be copper rgb value in the trail so it rules out the vapour trail plus it was 70% humidity at the time and i highly doubt any vapour would form at 26c 70%
>>474946248>Well known political photographer attends and takes pictures of events with important peopleHoly shit this is massive
>>4749635483) that bullet is from the other shooter with a different gun than crooks?
>>474963933it would have to be some kind of railgun to shoot that fast imo, definitely not propelled by any gunpowder if it is not photoshopped
thoughts on this pic?
>>474963758>exif data checks out for f1.6 and 1/8000, it's perfectly normal for a photographer to shoot that fast depending on his aperture and iso.This part I get, I've been doing still photography since my Nikon D70 and just purchased an a9 iii. > I believe it's photoshopped, there seems to be copper rgb value in the trail so it rules out the vapour trail plus it was 70% humidity at the time and i highly doubt any vapour would form at 26c 70%This is above my pay grade, I can just think about distance vs shutter speed>>474963933Not likely. The bullet trail is about a foot long in the photo. I can't comment on vapor trails and things, but if the shutter speed actually is 1/8000 of a second, the bullet would have to be going 8000fps to leave a foot long trail. There are guns that go 5000fps, but not 8k (I am using fps as feet per second)
>>474964308thicc
>>474964345what difference would the speed be if it was just a vapour trail? thats what i would like to know
>>474945481Waterboard them
>>474965507good question. I am a casual shooter, focusing on home defense, not long-range. So I have no idea when vapor trails form, how long they are, etc.A quick google search shows photos where the vapor trail is REALLY long
>>474946248wait you mean this is not just random fake from the internets and actually has a source? I never even assumed it was not posted anonymously
>>474965964yeah, all those pictures will show the bullet spinning as well, the trail left in trumps pic is dead straight, ive also been unable to find any slo-mo videos on youtube which show the vapour trails
>>474945481>These guys obviously knew what was up. Force to reveal their deep-state contacts. Waterboard these motherfuckers until they talk.
>>474965964
>>474966096Yeah, I don't see how it could be a vapor trail. The bullet itself being a straight line makes sense as it'd be smeared across the entire exposure, but he'd have to be 1/4000 or slower for the distance to work out. Very interesting indeed.
>>474966599check'd. its crazy how much this is overlooked, everyone is focusing on the 1/8000 argument in daylight not the trail left.How long do you think until they realise? The image was released within the hour of trump getting shot i believe so they could have just fucked up and not thought about the length when they photoshopped it
>>474966767>its crazy how much this is overlooked, everyone is focusing on the 1/8000 argument in daylight not the trail left.Agreed. I was looking at some old photos and I have some digital pics from literally 20 years ago that were taken at 1/8000 with my F/2 lens. >The image was released within the hour of trump getting shot i believe so they could have just fucked up and not thought about the length when they photoshopped itVery possibly. There is one final explanation I thought of, though - whether the camera was held portrait or landscape. Obviously the image looks landscape, but it could be a crop. Why this matters? Rolling shutter. The entire sensor gets 1/8000 of light, but not at exactly the same time. Normally this is irrelevant, but it could matter here. However most shutters roll top to bottom in landscape mode (which would not appreciably affect the bullet streak length).
>>474946248It's actually the same dude who took both photos.
>>474967340i'm not very knowledgeable with cameras anymore, i use to shoot with a canon 600D as a youngin, he used a sony A1 if that makes a difference, i think we can find out if its portrait or landscape by reviewing the footage around the photographers as it happened
>>474967340he was shooting landscape
>>474968041
>>474968041Nice Find>>474967702Well, even since the days of film, the leaf shutter would move a slit from top to bottom over the film. This happens really fast (a few ms), but the photo is not taken at the exact same time. There's actually a theory that the reason cartoons show cars and trains as slanted when going fast is due to the effect of rolling shutter. Anyway. The A1 has a rolling shutter time of 8.7ms https://www.cined.com/sony-a1-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-latitude/ but I can't find any info on the direction of the shutter roll. But that's 8/1000th of a second between the start of the frame and end of the frame.
>>474968378interesting, this is far beyond my knowledge i wonder if any other anons can chime in
>>474954115As a pro photographer, I have never once used 1/8000 outside of sporting events. State your experience. Then we can move to exchanging examples containing EXIF data so I can completely destroy you in front of these anonymous strangers.
>>474954465It was the CIA handing trump the next election
>>474968592I am a prosumer, who will do things like put my gear in "aperture priority" and shoot at f/1.8 in direct sunlight to get low depth of field for portraits. That's part of why I got the a9 iii - for that juicy 1/80,000 shutter speed.
>>474954514>zoomer circle kek. Clearly popped a prosthetic in the 2nd frame.
>>474968905So you use a 1/8000 shutter speed for portraiture? Is this what you are trying to say? A feature designed to catch a 90 mph baseball mid flight? Post your gear with timestamp. You are full of fucking shit.
>>474952455no shooting happened you low iq nigger, its idf plan to go to war with iran and of course the biggest kike is on board with the whole plan
>>474956356>we seem to have a difference of opinionI found what is reportedly the exif data on the photo, and it's even more retarded that I thought. I assumed he cranked the ISO, but no. No, if this data is legit, he went to f1.6 aperture to let in more light. That is pants on head retarded and every /p/tard knows it. He's trying to set his very expensive camera's sensor on fire now. All so he could have a pointlessly high shutter speed for the shot being taken >>474957628
>>474966225>I don't know that I need to setup my camera to with a high shutter speed and at least 30 fps to.>Then I have to fill my sd card in 10 seconds to capture the bulllet...Idiot.
>>474969271Almost as if he were expecting to catch some major and very explosive action sequence.
That's not how that works, why would a pawn know the actions of the queen?
>>474969579Pawn might have just been told where to be.
>>474945481Something wicked this way comesLast weekend the floodgates to hell was opened by daring this blatant aggressive attack against my people. Toleration only lasts so long. Have a good long hard look in the mirror tonight...
>>474969627Right, >WHO TOLD YOU TO GO THERE>m-my boss, like always?
>>474945481I'm curious about this for a lot of reasons.I'm not a photographer. But why would you want to take super speed photos that make everything look blurry and out of focus like all the lettering?Does 1/8000 mean 1/8000 of a second? The bullet look like it went almost a foot. 223 doesn't go 8000 feet per second.
>>474969042k. here you go.
>>474970569Okay, I'm not a ballistics expert, but anons have said "vapor trail" explains the length of the bullet. The bullet is the front part and the extra to the rear is trail. Is that right? IDK, but sounds plausible.I *will* explain why you would want a f1.6 aperture, and that reason is to narrow the plane of focus. Wide aperture is how you get those artistic bokeh effect shots like picrel. See how the person in the foreground is sharp and in focus but the background is all blurry. That's because the plane of focus is very narrow and the person is in it while the background is not. But if you look at the Trump photo, there is ZERO reason to be shooting a wide aperture shot, because there's nothing behind him but blue sky. And even IF there was something behind him, the 1/8000 shutter speed would negate your effort and you wouldn't have blurry anything. If he legit wanted to shoot wide aperture outdoors, he would have shot with a neutral density filter to counter the over exposure.The only reason the photographer shot this wide aperture was to address the under-exposure in the photo due to the maxed out shutter speed which is not necessary to capture blur free movements of an 80 year old man. However, opening your aperture that wide outdoors with no filter IS a very good way to ruin your camera if you do that for an hour or however long these rallies last.
>>474970896Bodied that gimp. nice.
>>474969271What does the setting "Exposure program: Manual" do?
>>474966225Holy shit! The real shooter, I'd recognize that beard and those brows anywhere.It wasn't Crooks OR Yearick
>>474971938That's letting him set both aperture and shutter speed manually. That tells you the photographer consciously chose these settings.
>>474960061see>>474959284
>>474972634????????????
>>474972847I think they just hadn't caught up on the thread
>>474969443if you've ever worked as a professional photographer for an event (i know you haven't) you'd understand that having a fast shutter speed goes way beyond needing to freeze a subject in motion.
>>474972847>???depends on the exact bullet that was usedanywhere between 2600 ft/s to 3200 ft/sI used 2800f/s to approximatein 1/8000 of a secondthe bullet will have traveled about 4.2 inches depending the trail in the pict is something like 16 inches long
>>474973770>nuh uh! fast shutter speed good. I won't explain myself. trust me brokys retard
>>474973988yeah, you're correct, it doesnt make any sense for it to be that long in the picture, i think there's 2 explanations, its a railgun or new tech probably not a gun or it's photoshopped, the odds of capturing a bullet casually like that to me is almost impossible
>>474969271>manualVery sus, even for an experienced photographer.Also sequencing when Trump was just turning his head to the right is very sus as well.Maybe the intention was to capture Trump’s head exploding and instead got only the picture of him looking at the board and decided to photoshop a bullet just for credits.We all know it was a set-up. Getting a picture of the murder of a ex-president on the moment of impact would have been historical. Think about it, he is the photographer of the white house, the secret services didn’t secure Trump off stage for minutes, they all knew it and didn’t avoid it.
>>474969271I'm actually more interested in his lens selection. After thinking about it, the ONLY lens that could give this EXIF data is the FE24mm F1.4. It seems like a weird lens for the environment. Why not any of the excellent zooms that touch on 24mm? (like 12-24 or 24-70)? F2.8 is plenty for a daytime shoot, and you have a lot more flexibility.
>>474948368Burst mode, dumb-ass. You have it on your phone, even.
>>474974396>the intention was to capture Trump’s head explodingyes, that was the intention, he was also shooting on a camera capable of 120 fps burst mode, so it seems very likely he was doing that with manual programming specifically to capture exactly that. They wanted to watch Trump's brains flying out of his head in excruciating detail.
anyone here good with photo forensics? whats with these? i dont see them in any other picture of the sky taken of trump
>>474974777CheckedThat said, the timing would still have to be split-second. The bullets are supersonic so by the time you hear it, he's already hit.
>>474974271>i think there's 2 explanationsthe other possible explanation, and im not saying its that,is what is in that picture is not the bulletit is a vapor trail that was instantaneously created by the pressure/temperature variation caused by the passing bulletthe trail lasted momentarily after the bullet had moved on, then disappearedTL;DRthe vapor trail lasted a moment longer after the bullet passed before dissipating >how long would that bewoah nellywe would need some pretty detailed information to know thattemp, pressure, humidity
>>474974946i looked up the humidity of july 13th in the area and it said 70-75% 26c at 6pm
>>474945481(((they))) missed
>>474975032>lookeddata at the exact location work on a saturday? ah man. Ill see what i can dooh, need barometric pressuretheres a nearby airportit might be available
>>474974946>>474975032And this is the stuff above my paygrade. Back to what I was saying here:>>474974615The photographer used a "prime lens" with a wider aperture to let in more light (and allow for higher shutter speeds) instead of a zoom. Again I'm not a pro, but I can't think of a good reason to do this unless you wanted to take a burst of freeze-frame images. As an amateur, I'd MUCH rather have a zoom lens to make framing easier if the situation changes. But they don't let in as much light (F/2.8 instead of F/1.4).
>>474974865That may be the pieces of podium that hit his ear. If that is what it is there were at least two shooters. Was there audio, well I guess two shooters could shoot at different times to get bullets there at the same time, one which missed him and one which hit the podium. I'm wondering how the audio matches this.
>>474945481Who is going to waterboard them? The people who do the waterboarding are the same people who organized this shooting.
>>474961923THat's a false lead. Obviously not the same lady and there would be no reason for someone that high profile to be part of the operation. The people that do this shit DO NOT HAVE PUBLIC PROFILES.
>>474945481I don’t think they knew but the jews who hired them and stationed them there knew. The head of security/SS probably knew (have they been ID’d? They’re probably jewish) and allowed it to happen. The jewish equity firm who tried to short his stock and said it was a clerical error absolutely knew, just look at their affiliates and donors they’re all jewish. This was a jewish operation and he was supposed to die live in 4K and all of America was supposed to see that video and his body forever. The catalog was supposed be full of webms of it to demoralize you. But the jews missed
>>474947032QRD?
>>474975599it might be sensor dust or something? im not sure, i dont do enough photo forensics to know https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2024/07/politics/photographers-trump-shooting-cnnphotos/media/images/s_BF38E266280C4332A29ED0AE9DACD0C37D30AAA3B2E109CFE8C8F22096A0F00F_1720995444439_h_16229021.jpgi can't find doug''s original upload though >>474975448https://www.localconditions.com/weather-meridian-pennsylvania/pa1094/past.phpmaybe this??
>>474974907yeah, he was lucky to catch the bullet in frame based on the high res shot here >>474954514and 2800 feet per second mentioned by >>474959284If we say that's 5 feet wide image, and 2800 feet/s while the camera catch 120 frames/sec then the bullet is traveling 2800/120 = 23.3 feet between each photo. 5/23.3 is about 21% chance of catching the bullet in frame. Then they probably had 8 photographers doing this same thing, who all knew he was going to be assassinated, just to make sure they get one shot with the bullet in it.
>>474975928The photographer who took the famous "bullet in the air" shot has been assigned to the white house since at least 9/11. Additionally, the length of the bullet in the photo does not match the exposure data (it travels too far). This suggests it might be shopped, or that some other scheme is behind the photo.
>>474945481won't happen because Trump is in on it you fucking NPC
>>474976191The problem is that the shutter speed is 1/8000 per the exif - and for 2800 fps the bullet should have only traveled around 3-4 inches (I ran the numbers for 3300 fps and got 4.89 inches in 1/8000 of a second). So the question is why is the line so big? Is it a vapor trail? Is it a shoop? is the EXIF wrong? The only other explanation I could think of was rolling shutter, but these cameras roll top to bottom, so it wouldn't affect something like a bullet.
>>474976192I was thinking vapor trail but then I see strong shading from sunlight, would a vapor trail have shiny white on top and dark on the bottom? I'm now confused. Maybe it is some kind of artifact. Hard to believe the shopped in a bullet that has a trajectory that clearly is below his ear with the claim it hit his ear. This is fucking confusing. We are confused because glowies are confused on what to do, because they missed.
>>474977070i think it's more probable that trump was never in danger to begin with.if trump died>rightwing riot/civil war potential>refusal to fight for israel against iran's "nuke">50 yr low recruitment numbersif trump survived>increase patriotism>fight for the countryIt helps no one killing trump, lefties dont want to fight israel because they've been killing gaza kids
>Trump is in on the plot to shoot Trump in the head>no actually he wanted to be shot in the ear>no actually the ear wound was faked with a razor on his finger>okay so its real but Trump is still in on it somehow because Orange Man Bad
>>474977070Or, as much as I hate to think about it, Trump was never in any danger, and his ear was cut during the drop and tackle. The shoop is just to sell the near-miss narrative.
>>474977346fight for israel*
>actually the left who has been rabidly calling for violence against Trump and his supporters for almost a decade now don't want Trump dead and they don't want to face the consequences of what might happen if Trump were killed
>>474977349I dunno anon. I'm just looking at pictures.
>>474977070There were multiple bullets you clown.
>>474977346>It helps no one killing trump,$100,000,000,000 in MIC profits if trump followed through on his promise to end ukraine asap?think it wouldnt happen?ukr would gladly volunteer to do that jobtheyve helped out before
>>474977678if trump was shot at and the photo is real(slim chance), that means the projectile is faster than a bullet which tells us its potentially some kind of highly accurate railgun able to graze his ear meanwhile crooks is just shooting blanks and another shooter located inside the buildings kill the bleacher guy
>>474975599It's a lectern, not a podium. Remember it thusly: The PODiatrist (foot doctor) stood on the PODium to read (LECtere) his LECture, which he placed on the LECtern.Terminology is your friend>written at 8,000 cps (characters per second) in MS paint
>>474977346>>474977678as a reminderNuland, Blinken, and Vindman's families are all ukrainian jews>now i have to get back to work
>>474977669yeah I think so as I said >>474975599
>>474977669There is ZERO chance of getting multiple bullets in one photo. The bullets travel 2800 - 3200 feet per second. Even the machine gun version of the AR15 only fires 900 rounds per minute (15 rounds per second). That means that even for a machine gun, the bullets are (1/15)*3200 or 213 feet apart in the air. The time between shots / distance between bullets is even greater for a semi-auto.
>>474952455For the same reason all the other media were there.AlsoIn case anyone is wondering why they closed the RNC with Dessun Norma (an opera song) this is why.Scene from Sum of all Fears where the traitors get theirs...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N4wMoqMzbw
Buddy it was all made up.
>>474945481The A9III can shoot 120 frames per second.
>>474945481>Waterboard these motherfuckers until they talk.I've got a better idea. Round up every single living journalist, release the dozen or so that are OK, and execute the rest.
>>474976740The exif data was likely altered
>>474977070It appears below his ear because Doug was standing on the ground shooting (his camera) upwards, not level with Trump's ear. Parallax effect or something.
>>474954635>GOAT>PLANE>MISSING 21 TRILLION>BUILDING 7
>>474977754more than likely its a vapor trail that lasted like .02 seconds after the bullet passedbut how long is what Im trying to work on
>>474945481first we waterboard OP.
>>474978200did you grab the data i sent you in the link before? humidity is even lower than what i said earlier
>>474976740>why is the line so big? Is it a vapor trail? Is it a shoop? is the EXIF wrong?I have disregarded this line of attack on the photo because it seems disingenuous. Why? Because none of the /k/ trannies who claim it's too long has bothered to work out what bullet would be long enough or slow enough to create the length we see in the photo. If they were genuinely interested in anything but sowing confusion, they would be discussing that. Additionally, I see what you see,>>474962024>(1/8000) it's almost exactly 4x longer. So yeah, seems about right.so I have no further reason to question the length of the blur.
>>474978283yes, but needed to do something else first
>>474978131Yes, see:>>474977999>>474976740>>474976191>>474973988>>474966265>>474963030>>474959146
>>474977999Who tf said anything about catching multiple shots in one shot? They are seconds apart, you absolute circus reject. The obvious implication of that statement is that the photograph is of a different bullet than the one that hit his ear.Another thing you retards in these threads keep intentionally ignoring and I've been pointing out for days now, is that no one is discussing the local topography, the hills in the area, which could easily explain any questions about angles and trajectories, but will continue to be ignored because it doesn't fit the retarded theorycrafting. Fucking Science!ists.And basically every professional photographer shoots at high speed settings in burst mode so when they take a shot they don't just have one photo they can select from but an entire stack so they can pick the one that looks best. No one but amateurs is using their single shot camera to try and capture perfect shots of things happening dynamically in real time. It is absolutely certain that members of "the media" in attendance will have been in on the plan, but the insinuation that professional photographers using high speed settings on their cameras is proof that they're one of them is ridiculous.
>>4749567251/8000 is perfectly normal in daylight. I almost always shoot with 1/4000 but that's because my camera can't do any faster.
>>474978530okay let me know what results you get, im keen to hear
>>474964308Based pooper shooter
>>474957628He uses it because he shot at f2 aperture, which helps soften the background/out of focus area and to make Trump stand out in the picture (by making the crowd behind him blurry). The more you want to separate your subject from the background, the faster your aperture needs to be, and the faster your shutter speed needs to be as well (to compensate for the increased light of a fast aperture).
>>474978559>The obvious implication of that statement is that the photograph is of a different bullet than the one that hit his ear.The point is that given the length of the trail, no bullet would match the published shutter speed. It'd have to be going over 6000 feet per second, which just isn't a thing. Now, the data could have been altered on the photo, but if so, why? A slower shutter speed would explain the longer trail, but it'd be overexposed at the F/1.6 listed in the EXIF data. So they'd have to fake ALL of the exposure data. Why? The simple answer is someone just drew in a bullet streak, and didn't bother to calculate the correct length.
>>474947032>This is like that mortician who performed all the convenient autopsies.
>>474978921First, it was shot at F/1.6. However, the depth of field argument is a little bit sus because there was nothing behind Trump but blue sky. Not a crowd or anything. Second, we aren't questioning the 1/8000 shutter speed - it lines up with F1.6 just fine. We're questioning the length of the bullet trail. 5.56 ammo travels at a maximum of 3200 feet per second, and often much slower. This means during a 1/8000 second interval, the bullet should only travel between 3 and 6 inches. The bullet streak is clearly much longer.
>>474947653You're a moron It's a rally, you basically have to shoot at that speed, in burst mode, cause 90% would be blurry if you didn't This is first day photojournalism stuff
>>474978400>>>474962024 (You)>>(1/8000) it's almost exactly 4x longer. So yeah, seems about right.>so I have no further reason to question the length of the blur.Yeah that was before OP told me to go do the math, and I did. Turns out a bullet traveling 3200 feet per second only travels a few inches in 1/8000 of a second.
>>474978921What crowd. You mean he wanted to blur out the sky?
>>474979239>This means during a 1/8000 second interval, the bullet should only travel between 3 and 6 inches. The bullet streak is clearly much longer.This is likely due to distortion/rolling shutter from the readout speed of the sensor. I think he used a Sony A1 which has about 4-5ms in readout speed, which is very fast, but still enough to have an effect, especially with something as fast moving as a bullet.
>>474979532The crowd was behind Trump. Not in this shot, but he probably didn't take all photos from just this particular angle.
>>474945481They were supposed to capture the exact moment the back of his head exploded.
>>474945481Have you chuds stopped talking about the shooter's motives because he's now clearly been outed as a rightoid and uncomfortably close in background to most of you?
>>474945481chevron deference
>>474979596We discussed that were unable to make up our minds on it's impact, given that shutters roll from top to bottom and the bullet is moving sideways>>474967340>>474968378>>474976740If you could bring some maths to the argument on how it'd affect a narrow horizontal band like that it'd be helpful.
>>474948194Nah not for 1/8000, maybe 1/500 or 1/1000 but 1/8000 is technically advanced and unusual for regular use
>>474961923Not clear enough to be definitive
>>474979596First 3 shots were from unidentified professional 3 carefully aimed shots shooter perhaps with 22-250. The next 6 was the patsy quick trigger pull from an amateur. Makes sense 22-250 would be traveling close to 5000 fps instead of 3000fps out of an AR
>>474979694Would a professional make an adjustment if they use different settings depending on need to blur the background?
>>474979904I gotta run now but maybe there is an answer here:https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/80063/if-a-rolling-shutter-travels-from-top-to-bottom-why-does-this-image-seem-to-sho
>>474960158I thought the lines couldn't touch each other.
>>474979694Also, I am not a professional, but it's been a big hobby of mine for years. The photographer used a 24mm F/1.4 prime lens. This seems really odd to me for daytime photography when Sony makes several great zooms, either the 12-24 F/2.8 or the 24-70 F/2.8. F/2.8 still gives you a nice depth of field, but gives you a lot more framing options whether you go wide or telephoto.
>>474980566> it is a frame capture from a video recording.did you read what you even linked?
>>474980566Thanks
>>474980741Well, it actually could be relevant based on how the "burst mode" works on the A1. He was shooting at 120FPS burst mode, and the camera might process that like a video
>>474945481Why is a Pulitzer Price winning Photographer at a Trump Rally anyway? Was he there the other rallies too? Why was he there at that day? Dies his wife work for Mossad. Like the German Journalist that was there for the Terror Attack in Nice and the Mass Shooter in Munich.
>>474980934if he's shooting burst mode, why won't he release more pictures? the 3 he released were not a 120fps burst, i obviously have no idea what im talking about but im trying to cover all bases
>>474980935Fun FactMSM NEVER covers Trump rally live. What made them start that day?
>>474976192It's a vapor trail, it can even be seen in the live video feed.
>>474977678Outside contractor that took the kill shot was Ukrainian. He arrived on a Harley, rolled up to the building Crooks was on just before Trump started speaking. Went to his tree perch near water tower--took the shots (rushed because people saw Crooks on roof) and bounced leaving his Harley parked right where he left it.FACT there is zero way anyone stationed in the ARG building didn't hear Crooks moving...a tin roof is like an echo chamber.Japan news caught harley in their overview of Crook's spot on ARG.Eye witnesses saw him roll up....they went back the next day to point out where they'd seen him--the Harley was still there parked in the same place.1.2
>>474981272link to said video and don't link the one of a bullet hitting the bleacher railing and atomising
>>474981288Eyewitness image of Harley in same spot the next day when they went back..this was as close as they could get.2/3
>>474981269The outcome of the debate. Start of the news cycle going into fake and gay rnc.
>>474968378> There's actually a theory that the reason cartoons show cars and trains as slanted when going fast is due to the effect of rolling shutter. Animator here, this doesn’t really matter to the thread but yes that’s why it’s done. Early animation especially really focused on mimicking camera distortions, it’s where the idea of smearing started which was taken from motion blur
>>474981160Burst mode would only be useful if Trump was hit and you were looking for that perfect headshot. Most of the photos would be identical - think of how little most people move during one second. >>474980935Wow, now that is suspicious>>474980317That would explain a lot actually. 22-250 pushes 5000 fps, and combined with the rolling shutter argument, that might fully explain the path.
>>474981444I snagged this image off Chris Martenson's review--guess which vehicle is there when the cops roll up.The cop cars are parked like they just rushed in--so they were not there until after the shooting.I'm nailing the numbers on these posts..what does it mean?88, 444, what will this one be?
>>474981518so the argument for using 1/8000 should actually be the burst mode because no one is going to be filling up their SD card with useless pictures unless you were anticipating something
>>474981444>>474981288Leaking picture of the shooter
>>474970896Yeah you’ve got gear but his point about portraiture stands, that’s too fast for a portrait, you’re not letting enough light in, but I guess at that point it can also just be an artistic choice depending on how you process it Relax bros, you both know how to use cameras
>>474981622You've gotten some good digits for sure>>474981467Nice to know some random fact I remembered is accurate, thanks!
>>474981823LOL eye witnesses to his rolling up and parking then disappearing within seconds say he was wearing black skinny jeans and had a yellow flag around his neck the don't tread on me flag.They were stumped when he poofed within seconds--they thought he went into the building because the door was closed then it was open. His was the only vehicle in the lot. around the lot were police (likely statie traffic control).>>474981886Yep...88, 444, and 22--what does it all mean?
>>474981518Even at a shutter speed of 1/8000, there's a very minimal chance of the rolling shutter distortion making the bullet appear noticeably longer in the Sony a1's 128-frame burst mode. Here's why:Very fast shutter speed: 1/8000 is an extremely fast shutter speed. This means the sensor readout time (the time it takes to capture the entire image) is very short.Bullet velocity vs. readout time: Let's assume a typical bullet velocity of around 1500 meters per second (m/s). Even at this high speed, the distance the bullet travels during the sensor readout time at 1/8000 shutter speed is minimal.Calculations:Sensor readout speed (1/8000 shutter speed) = 1 / 8000 seconds = 125 microseconds (millionths of a second)Bullet velocity (assumed) = 1500 m/sDistance traveled during readout time = velocity * time = 1500 m/s * 125 microseconds = 0.01875 meters (around 1.8 centimeters)Sensor width: Full-frame camera sensors like the Sony a1 typically have a width of around 0.036 meters.Relating to distortion:The bullet only travels about 1.8 centimeters during the sensor readout time, which is a very small percentage of the sensor width (around 52%).This minimal distance traveled during readout makes it highly unlikely for the rolling shutter to cause a significant length distortion in the bullet image.Conclusion:While rolling shutter distortion is always a possibility in electronic shutters, at a shutter speed of 1/8000, the sensor readout is so fast that for most bullet velocities, it wouldn't be enough to create a noticeable lengthening effect. You might see a slight tilt or bend if the bullet isn't perfectly horizontal, but overall, the bullet should appear mostly accurate in terms of length.this is what gemini AI is telling me, tell me if it sounds right because you know how AI is
>>474969443Yes he was expecting to catch the assination in graphic detail. everyone would still be aware that it was intentional. But it was supposed to demoralize amd frighten everyone in support of Trump. It's too bad they missed. These people will hang.
>>474981288>>474981444>>474981622I haven't heard any of this before though, it is interesting>>474981821Well, again, 1/8000 isn't super sus by itself - it's all the other factors. I think capturing the bullet might have been an accident, and the intent was to capture a headshot in super high detail... or something i don't even know anymore. But thanks for keeping the thread going It's given me a lot to think about.
>>474983150The the New York Times photographer, Doug Mills, is quoted as shooting at 30fps 1/8000.
>>474948368This, he was told when it was going to happen and paid to get the pictures.
>>474983150without you doing the math yourself this thread would have died, you kept it going so thank you fren, hopefully we can make this opinion more known
>>474983201Assuming he's not lying, that's a reasonable rate of speed to try and catch the perfect facial expression and hand gesture. SD cards are cheap, and you can just delete the pix you don't use. >>474982828Don't let exposure time and readout speed mix you up. I've seen different numbers in this thread, but the time to read the data from the sensor is several milliseconds, not microseconds. The only constant is that each pixel will be gathering light for 1/8000 of a second, but, not all at the same time. Normally the effects of rolling shutter are really obvious, But I just don't know enough to comment on what is effectively a straight line. Also, I specifically bought the camera I did (Sony a9 iii) because it's one of the few cameras to have a global shutter (every pixel is captured at once). >>474983386Thanks. You opened my mind (in a good way haha) to a new possibility.
>>474983386I got to thinking if there were any photos of a bullet taken midair with a rolling shutter. So I went back to this article you linked here. This is the effect of rolling shutter on a bullet. See how it slants as you go from top to bottom? That's the lines being read out as the bullet moves.
>>474984122it would be nice if there was a way to test it ourselves, unfortunately i dont own the camera nor gun, maybe in the future someone will try to re-create it? either way i feel more confident in there being foul play rather than him capturing the bullet naturally
>>474984842side by side, would be nice to know what shutter speed he was using
>>474970896Too bad you didn't realize the plastics on that camera have an embedded dot matrix related to its serial number. The glownigger now knows your name. You will be the photographer who catches the next biggest scoop. How does that make you feel?
>>474983150They recap the eyewitness testimony from the previous day's video then visit the site where they were stunned to see the motorcycle still there.https://youtu.be/uRtf_ut0_3g?t=175Oddly no one else is seeking out these two--they also catch FBI canvassing the neighborhood. She didn't realize it was FBI but blue polo and khaki pants confirms..also you can hear him say FBI if you listen closely.
>>474985018Yeah, I downloaded the image but unfortunately the exif is stripped. They mention on the site using everything from 1/8000 to 1/32000>>474985197lol k. Like my IP address doesn't do that already? It's not like I'm behind 7 proxies.
>>474985502here's the noise analysis
>>474985451Too many fucking mysteries and unknowns here.... all extremely suspicious. >>474985826Interesting. That does seem to show a downward path... Which could be rolling shutter elongating it... or just the way you'd draw a line from an elevated shooter. Honestly I'm surprised no new footage has come out - there was a ton the first hour or two, then everything basically got locked down. There were dozens of press and 20k in the stands. You're telling me there's not ANYTHING new to look through?
>>474986205yeah its strange how we aren't seeing 100s of phone videos, every man and his dog was recording, especially as it was happening
>>474945481Its 2024, camera can record video with still picture.
>>474985451Video archived>>474986409Exactly. Anyway, I'm archiving this thread, and gonna think over it some more. I don't have a firm outcome in my mind, but I could see: 1) evidence for a 2nd shooter with a faster bullet 2) evidence the photo is shopped, 3) a nothingburger, due to a combination of vapor trail + rolling shutter making it look longer than the math would suggest. I'll keep my eye on the thread until it 404s, but I can't think of anything new to add. Have a good one, anon!
Why isn’t anyone talking about metal roofs approaching 150 degrees fahrenheit during the summer in the US? Supposed shooter was in short and a T-shift.
>>474986941Like the guy really was on the roof though. So maybe drugs? I don't think that guy did anything but spray anyway.
>>474986941I would like to know if they will do autopsy. I would like to know if he took some drug before doing it.
>>474945481Your assets shall be seized by the state. Your rights are forfeit. You and your family are to report to their designated reeducation camp immediately.
>>474986857>Have a good one, anon!you too man, i'll see you around
>>474986205Get this one too--the original interview with the eye witnesses.She recapped this in the video you've already seen.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvTT27uq7DMI keep an eye on this gal because she's fucking tenacious autistic lawyer with a brain that rarely appears in women.She was investigating AURA a mind control "software" that was being used on people (aka experimented on) that she culled from Soft White Underbelly--"Lima"'s identity is mysterious--she has sailed along getting away with literal murder. Mark Laita is involved in this balls deep. "Lima's" twin sisters were also experimented on.I was looking for connections between this mind control method and Harley Pasternak. Hollywood handler, ex MOSSAD self-admitted mind control expert.She's also gotten heavily involved in scam "conservatoire" cases in Hollywood. Like Bam Margeta and Brittany Spears.
>>474986941Interesting. I've never been on a metal roof before, only asphalt shingle and ceramic tile. But you're right I wouldn't want to lay down on either of them. >>474987515Got it>>474987483o7
>>474987483>>474978663i had to do some cheatingtoo many variablesa vapor trail would have lasted several seconds, would have been substantial in length ie yards +, and would have been visible to anyone looking at the correct angle of view considering lighting conditionsthere is a slim chance that it could be what is known as a "bullet trail" a light reflection phenomenon caused by air pressure diffraction but those are almost always only viewable observing parallel to the flight path conclusionthe streak in the pic is not a standard vapor trailit may be some sort of photo artifactthe camera-fags would have to answer that
>>474988906Awesome, adding this to the screencap. Thanks for doing the research.
>>474988906based thanks anon
>>474988906addendumthere is a chance its a photo of the supersonic shock wave of the bulletsomeone would have to check the timing of the photo and the sound of the wave as opposed to the sound of the gunshot
>>474988049Crooks was shot from behind--it's not the water tower, but the reason there wasn't an overwatch posted there is because they were posting the contractor (motorcycle guy?) in the trees. That's why so many people kept pointing to the water tower--nearby but not ON the tower.Did contractor go into building, drop the yellow flag and then melt into the trees to assume his post? OR...here's a big or..I recall the first day (just like Vegas) people saying there was a shooter in the crowd on the ground. Reading the comments on the first eye witness video (sorted newest) people mention seeing a man with a yellow flag on but with it pulled over his head, in some videos but no one can remember which one. I do recall people talking about this guy the first day--the yellow flag or "the guy in the yellow".What if the shot taken at 60 feet was fired from the ground UPward?I dunno but this needs digging.Oddly, when I call out "Crooks was really Yearick" faggot--he ignores my queries--was Yearick trained as a sniper when he was fighting for Ukraine? I find that odd. He wants so badly to prove Crooks was Yearick but dodges a chance to say YES YES Yearick was the contractor.
>>474986941>>474988049He could have brought a shooting mat with him. They roll up.
>>474989598Hmm. Interesting. I haven't seen that photo either. One thing the MSM has confirmed is that the counter-snipers we saw on tv didn't take the shot. So that definitely fits.
>>474989642Just more details that need to surface. When they showed the shooter he was laying on the metal. Doesn’t mean he didn’t have a mat but the news helicopter that took the roof shot showed no mat.
>>4749894655.56mm projectile:Speed: Mach 3 (approx. 914 m/s)Dominant Frequency: In the range of 3,000 Hz to 7,000 Hz (estimate based on Mach number).Projectile at Mach 5:Speed: 5 times faster than 5.56mm (approx. 4570 m/s)Dominant Frequency: Likely higher than the 5.56mm due to the higher Mach number. Estimated range: 7,000 Hz and above (rough estimate).if we can get a full spectrum audio capture we might be able to deduce whether the sonic boom was from a 5.56 speed vs the speeds of what the trump image shows
>>474990116It's possible but unlikely it blew away. From the photos and video the likely answer is he was on bare metal.
>>474989598why is everyone saying a thermal scope. your retarded if you think that they would be using a thermal
>>474990058That image of the gloved cop hand yanking his head back and the other cop taking that picture is unethical af and not part of any legit criminal investigation. The published it right away. This is literally insane. Also "cops" were laughing their asses off while on the roof by his body.The only other time a pic like this was released was Vegas.
>>474990716Which means he was likely on drugs or not on the roof for any length of time while alive. I can’t find the photo in MSM, they’re all blurred.
>>474990116Shot from the rear/sidish in the neck bullet exited mouth area pushing his teeth OUT. Here he is rolled over on the gun...
>>474990851Does anyone have anything official about this photo? Is what you’re saying the official word? Why should be trust this photo at all if it’s not officially released?
>>474990851Zoomed in...laughing. Why? we just pulled it off?
>>474990965There was another bird’s eye photo where the gun was pushed away without a mat.
>>474990997Not that I would trust the government or official sources that release a photo but it’s strange a lot of people take the photo as truth then starts litigating who the shooter is or isn’t which to me is always a red flag.
>>474990851Being optimistic, I think this photo was taken to prevent his ID from getting blackholed.
>>474991495Could be the other way too, to cement his identity as the shooter. Right?
>>474990997You can see the black gloved hand, you can see that's Crooks--so no the image was not "officially released" it was a power move by whoever created this mess. That image should never have been taken or released the way it was--almost immediately sent from phone to social media--since when is that proper procedure?BTW it's glowniggers that were releasing the image of Crooks on the cement wall. They dropped the first one--but the other day they dropped this one.These images of him on the wall were taken from above--but glowniggers leaning out a window? where were these images taken? They publish them so closely cropped you can't pinpoint where they were taken. Wouldn't want to incriminate themselves more than they already are.
>>474980935They were hoping for a VP announcement.
>>474945481>>474946248>>474946641>>474954436>>474947653All you people are fucking braindead retarded. You don't "plan" to take a photo of a bullet exactly as it's passing by a guy's head. Like that's actually so fucking stupid it makes me think you faggots are feds trying to psyop everyone into making everyone dumber.
>>474991816> That image should never have been taken or released the way it was--almost immediately sent from phone to social media--since when is that proper procedure?That’s my point, it seems highly sus they released it the way it was released. My gut instinct is to not trust it. And to certainly not trust those that bypass this fact and try to further litigate the shooters identity from this photo.
>>474991657Very possibly>>474991816Yeah the existence of this image is very sus>>474992334Nobody's arguing that. The argument is 1) were they planning on getting shots of Trump's head exploding, and/or 2) was the bullet trail shopped? >>474992336I'm not completely onboard, but agree this is a possibility
>>474993002> I'm not completely onboard, but agree this is a possibilityI’m in the same place. Just pointing out how convenient it is for others to by pass the source credibility of the photograph and start litigating identity.
>>474991174Yeah not sure how his body got moved so far from edge. The dead shot shows him at the edge--but other shots show him zip tied on his belly with hands behind him and the gun at least 15 feet away and the backpack at least 40? feet away.He was shot closer to the dark siding overhang with the security light because said light is seen in full close up behind the cops. Now he's a good ways away from it.Did they move him to a better position to support the trajectory that he shot trump?>>474991495No I think the pic was taken so the Yearick glownigger could start pushing Maxwell Yearick as the perp which he did--right away and spreading it everywhere.if you look at the video I posted of the eye witnesses to Harley dude arrival--Yearick faggot comments on that video.Then they further muddied the ID waters with the Jewgazin faggot posting a side view of himself with jaw jutting out and letting that spread that HE was the shooter.All this muddy waters crap is to keep people from finding their balance and digging into the shooting straight off.
>>474989598that picture of the ''dead'' shooter could have been taken on any roof top similar to that one. It could have been taken days or weeks before. Just good makeup and a photo OP, then he gets back up like nothing happened. Reminder that EVERYONE in the stands behind Trump is a Fed, Shill, Jew, Actor. No one died behind Trump that day. Rest assured: No bullets will be recovered just like in Vegas.
>>474991816Fun fact--there is a cement wall right below where he was seen on the roof by the civilians.BTW Yearick faggot really didn't like that video. This is a still from a civilian video where they were yelling at cops and pointing to Crooks on the roof--he is seen moving around in that video--how tf didn't the supposed people in the building NOT hear someone moving around on a "hot tin roof"? Just to the left of the wall is the homeless bike dude (whose bike was pushed as yet another Crooks vehicle). Yearick faggot tried to claim that Crooks was sitting on the ground and Yearick was on the roof.There's some fucking fuckery around. I have pic of Homeless bike dude and that is HIM on the ground.IF this is the cement wall Crooks was photographed sitting on--things just got a hella lot more interesting.Crooks was also see wandering around on the other side of the fence for at least an hour before the shooting. That poor kid was just another groomed glownigger patsy.
>be faggot.>Too much evidence that Trump didn't fake his own assassination is proof Trump faked his assassination.>ignore that Biden said time to put him in the crosshairs. >ignore that the SS allowed the sniper to take a few shots before silencing the sniper. >ignore that the FBI lied about Yearick. >ignore that there are no pictures of a dead Crooks. >Ignore that the head of the SS is a "Nevertrumper". >Ignore that head of SS pulled half his SS detail to biden's wife, and literally replaced at least one with an untrained cook.
>>474994459the last shot was possibly the only real shot (with an actual bullet) in that entire event. Secret Service shot at the gun to move it away from him.
>>474945481>>474993002stupid new civil war movie was about journos and photographers taking pictures of such.>https://www.reuters.com/pictures/frame-by-frame-trump-survives-assassination-attempt-2024-07-14/
Reminder: This picture is FAKE. It was made by makeup artists. He is not dead.
If that hit him that photo would be too disgusting to use as propaganda though
Ear bandage already off.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=662OZC1g6YY
>>474995955He's wearing a band-aid. I'm watching it right now.
>>474994459> Did they move him to a better position to support the trajectory that he shot trump?Good question. Shame someone can’t ask them directly about the body placement. It’s starting to feel like they expected to kill Trump, immediately pivot to start a war with Iran, then bury the assassination details under the guise of national security bypassing FOIA requests for half a century, as so many have already alluded to. The Iran narrative is also sus. Started to surface after expert opinions from other nationalities version of Secret Service, pointed out that the shooter would have to have the assistance of some type of government in order to get into that type of position, to even have an opportunity to take a shot. The entire rollout of the attempt is a huge fiasco. It’s comical how unofficially the blame seems to be falling towards DEI as a scapegoat. While I agree, that is certainly reasonable. It’s very suspect that several major companies have ditched DEI within a few days of this happening. Almost as this concept was groomed over the last several years for particular purpose. Or to explain a particular set of events. Maybe that’s a stretch, too far of a conspiracy.
>>474995955Better shot
>>474995538also looks like reuters had drone guy over the next day, which is where the hose pic came fromhttps://www.reuters.com/pictures/scenes-trump-assassination-attempt-investigation-2024-07-15/>>im ignoring leafs today
>>474995479Now that is an interesting theory. >>474996264Yes, they definitely did not expect this timeline and are struggling to find a direction.
At the rally they just announced they're changing the senator for 2024. Mike Rodgers.
>>474995383We're just looking for discrepancies. Right now, the best evidence is that there were two shooters. A higher velocity round would better explain the length of the bullet trace. Read more than the first few posts.
>>474997329wait wait... why does the 'best evidence' point to two shooters?
>>474998547See>>474980317>>474981518The length of the bullet streak is too long (too fast) for 5.56, even 55 grain. With the shutter speed of the camera, the streak should be about 5 inches long. Something faster like the rounds mentioned above would match the bullet streak length much closer.
>>474995479>Secret Service shot at the gun to move it away from him.why do people keep pushing that hollywood faggotrynobody shoots a gun awayand not on a corrugated metal roofhow did the rifle jump over 4, 4inch high metal seams?
>>474947653They wanted to plaster the internet and news with a still frame of his brains blowing out.
>>474998966>The length of the bullet streak is too long (too fast) for 5.56, even 55 grain. With the shutter speed of the camera, the streak should be about 5 inches longOh, so you're just a retarded faggot. Cool I thought you actually had something thanks for wasting everyone's time
>>474999228This>>474999521OK, so what's your explanation for a bullet traveling 3200 feet per second (or less) making a foot long streak in a photo that's 1/8000 of a second? Read the damn thread we've been discussing possibilities all day.
>>474994972That is absolutely the wall that he was photographed on. The local PD snipers were stationed on the 2nd floor and took that pic at 5:14 pm.
Lol.
>>474991816Crooks was sitting here when the pictures were taken. The local PD snipers were on the second floor looking down on him through the windows. This was around 5:14.
>>474947653>>474957628>>474999228This is all proof that it was a live round being fired at Trump and it wasn't staged. We can at least agree on that.
>>474999521>Oh, so you're just a retarded faggot. Cool I thought you actually had something thanks for wasting everyone's time>show up late>dont read thread>make pants on head comments>profit?simple versionthe famous bullet streak pic is way too long for the type of gun the gov says was usedbut it does fit with a specialized snipe riflesee>>474963030
>>474999897I really wish I could see his chin better. Is it blurred on purpose? I'm trying to see the chin hair that is in the dead pic.
>>474996264Here's a roof top image I marked the security light on the dark siding overhang (right over where motorcycle dude parked) that is easily visible in the image I posted with the laughing cops.I get perspective but for the life of me I can't figure out how that light is so close to the cops and the body in that image but in this image the body (on belly with zip ties) is so far away from the overhang.
>>474999896You are not that good at math, buddy. Fuck yourself.
>>474988906anon, i was thinking while i was gone and do you think trumps ear being hit could have caused the vapour trail?
>>475000366Yeah thanks faggot I gathered that: how are you measuring the fucking streak, retard?You're not. That's how I know you're a faggot.Stop shitting up the board.
>>474945481Reminder to take your meds
>>474999033Yet another unpublished glownigger image pushing Yearick.Crooks legs were dirty, as anyone can see the roof is dirty as it would be and he's crawling along.So where did this image come from eh?In this video he is not near the light or overhang (if I published the right video, fingers crossed).Come on glownigger post the un edited image...fuckwad.he's already on his belly here, where's the blood trail? Why is this editied? why blur out the shoes eh? fuckwad.
>>475000847but the top of trumps ear was hit, and the photo was taken from below. I read trump said he felt a near miss before he was hit I think this bullet photo was the near miss.
>>474999897Yep. But THIS is the image of cement walls the glowniggers posted to push the "they were in the window" narrative.>>475000334This one.Fuckwads.
>>475000922checked but why are you raiding this thread.
>>475001259yeah that's true, im just trying my hardest to cover every possible base, threads about to get archived ill see u round
>>475001454>>475001259>>475001273Likewise. Was good anons.
>>475000847>caused the vapour trailyes but.........is that the shot that hit him?if it was, then yes, that could actually be vaporized tissueIve been trying to work trump EXACT head anglenot which bullet did whatnot only did trumps head fake save his lifeit points to where the shot came from
>>474969443https://x.com/foundring1/status/1814458685701402685
>>475001758What a stupid fucking waste of time, just like any other grumbling about holding a congressional hearing.No one ever says anything of note in those hearings, they're just theater. He'll go on and say blah blah blah just sheer luck and that will be it.
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/tnum/474945481/page/1/ if anyone wants to reference later
>>475001881Agreed. I almost want to make an x account to reply after all the discussion we had haha
>>475001992I got banned from X a week before this event. Most of my posts were re Silicone Joe with proofs. My x email account inbox was FULL of warnings and posts reach limited. Example of one warning--it was a bullshit to get rid of me because I was relentless on Silicone Joe. Was starting to get momentum and people were starting to notice. This image is re the routine of war narrative...
>>475002295Surprised there's still so much censorship. I got banned pre-elon just for supporting Trump. Never bothered to make another account.
>>474994459Ok I reviewed all of your images. I don’t see any photos of laughing cops with a location. Only the zoomed in one here >>474991126. Based on the roof trim he’s close to the top of the roof. I believe the “water tower” in picrel is actually the security camera. This would place the body photo at the top of the roof, not near the edge.
>>475002649Interesting. Thread is about to archive. Thank you for your research!
>>475002649Use your eyes. I have marked the light EASILY seen and not at a distance. TWO red arrows.
