- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 7/28/24 at 8:41 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
The weird thing to me is every time we talk about this; it’s the same guys coming in every time to say no no no. Can’t be. Nah.
It is just that some on here try to let logic, not emotion, dictate their decision making process.
The window shooter theory has several problems. Not the least of them, as is shown above in this thread, is that the “scope reflection” that Cullen claims proves this is true was still visible in the window well after the shooting.
Some of you guys need to think things through before you believe everything on the internet.
So is this three or four confirmed assassins? Rooftop, window, wood line and water tower? And they all missed. Add in the sniper and the guy that shot the dude on the roof in the back of the head and there were six people shooting. That is a lot.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 8:45 am to Chad504boy
quote:
Window in the OP is the window I’ve been saying for days
That has been my concern from the beginning
Water tower and tree line are “magic tricks” to divert attention
Would love to know the details of that building (underground ingress/egress/storage)
The shot was missed because it was planned to make it seem like an amateur lone gunman pulled it off (the patsy). More shots would have blown cover and likely impaired the egress of the 2nd shooter…
Posted on 7/28/24 at 8:47 am to the808bass
quote:
That’s a weird argument.
It’s a much closer shot and the “light” is much smaller.
I don’t think the claimed photo evidence is all that conclusive of a second shooter.
But your debunking isn’t either
What he said.
The only thing I've seen which seems credible is that audio analysis which detects the time between the projectile sound breaking sound barrier and the boom from the shot.
That clearly shows two shooters.
Perhaps the very last shot shows a third. The third wasn't as conclusive as the other two.
This post was edited on 7/28/24 at 8:50 am
Posted on 7/28/24 at 8:51 am to dgnx6
quote:
because we witnessed an act of God to protect Trump.
Absolutely we did. Where have you been?
quote:
I’m going to start going to church
You already should have been.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 8:54 am to captdalton
quote:
captdalton
I’m discussing the topic. If you don’t feel like it then stay out of the thread and let others talk about it.
And this isn’t emotion. This is a fricking reflection in the fricking window you fricking douche canoe.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 8:57 am to lake chuck fan
quote:possible muzzle flash but a clearly opened window pane should lead most to the truth of those pictures are for real. Which happen to explain where I’ve been banging my drum precisely at.
I don’t think the claimed photo evidence is all that conclusive of a second shooter.
This post was edited on 7/28/24 at 9:03 am
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:02 am to TDTOM
Everyone should know this, the room design, the shooter could have been tucked back sort of back and to right of window and have the direct line to Trump. The angle of this photo, you’re essentially looking into the window but the left wall I believe is near the edge of left side of window.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:04 am to Chad504boy
You are correct about one thing. I am on the fence about this. Because I don’t know exactly what happened other than it seems hard to believe that someone was able to get that close to Trump with a rifle. And in plain view nonetheless.
I don’t know exactly what happened. But neither do you. Nobody can even keep track of how many times you have changed your theory. At this point the only place you haven’t claimed the bullet came from is the international space station. The one constant though has you been claiming everyone of your theories is the correct one. Until you watch a different youtube or X video and you believe a different one.
You are coming off as a little insane. Your angry outburst this morning doesn’t help.
I don’t know exactly what happened. But neither do you. Nobody can even keep track of how many times you have changed your theory. At this point the only place you haven’t claimed the bullet came from is the international space station. The one constant though has you been claiming everyone of your theories is the correct one. Until you watch a different youtube or X video and you believe a different one.
You are coming off as a little insane. Your angry outburst this morning doesn’t help.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:05 am to captdalton
quote:
You are correct about one thing. I am on the fence about this. Because I don’t know exactly what happened other than it seems hard to believe that someone was able to get that close to Trump with a rifle. And in plain view nonetheless. I don’t know exactly what happened. But neither do you. Nobody can even keep track of how many times you have changed your theory. At this point the only place you haven’t claimed the bullet came from is the international space station. The one constant though has you been claiming everyone of your theories is the correct one. Until you watch a different youtube or X video and you believe a different one. You are coming off as a little insane. Your angry outburst this morning doesn’t help.
frick off.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:12 am to Errerrerrwere
Ok, let’s talk about the reflection of the scope in the window. Why do you think it was still visible well after the shooting? Was the shooter still standing there holding the rifle? Or did he leave it attached to a tripod? Or maybe the reflection of the rife scope isn’t a rifle scope at all? Maybe it is something else all together?
How do you explain it?
How do you explain it?
This post was edited on 7/28/24 at 9:13 am
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:17 am to Errerrerrwere
This is becoming just like the Kennedy assassination. One theory blamed the CIA, another the MIC. Some blamed the Mafia. Others blamed LBJ, the Cubans or the Russians.
Books were written, elaborate plots were laid out, and each had their own logical conclusion.
The problem was that they all couldn’t be right.
So far we have plots with a guy on the roof, the water tower, in the woods, in the first floor and in a second building.
Are all these plots correct?
Books were written, elaborate plots were laid out, and each had their own logical conclusion.
The problem was that they all couldn’t be right.
So far we have plots with a guy on the roof, the water tower, in the woods, in the first floor and in a second building.
Are all these plots correct?
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:17 am to captdalton
quote:
How do you explain it?
It doesn’t have to be the rifle scope at all. My thought is we shouldn’t even be able to see the rifle the first 3 shots. The window pane movement is all that is needed. It was probably two fricks in that room working quicker
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:17 am to Chad504boy
Have you calculated how high off the ground the bullet would have been when it passed over and/or through the throng of people standing at the fence if the shot had come from the window? It is pretty easy, there is even an online calculator that will do it for you.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:23 am to captdalton
quote:
Have you calculated how high off the ground the bullet would have been when it passed over and/or through the throng of people standing at the fence if the shot had come from the window? It is pretty easy, there is even an online calculator that will do it for you
I've wondered that also, but haven't wanted to get too involved in this discussion. It was reported that Trump's head was about 13' above the ground, considering his height and the stage. The ground looks flat. Seems possible that a shot could be made from the window, as far as elevation is concerned.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:23 am to captdalton
quote:
Have you calculated how high off the ground the bullet would have been when it passed over and/or through the throng of people standing at the fence if the shot had come from the window?
You continue to think you have a gotcha. Trump is on a 4 foot stage. The ground elevation is 3 feet higher than building. Aimed for trumps head. It’s an upward trajectory that clearly clears over all people you wrongly assume are in the way.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:32 am to captdalton
quote:He wants it so bad
But neither do you. Nobody can even keep track of how many times you have changed your theory.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:33 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
The ground looks flat.
Is it all flat?
Is there some kind of survey showing this because that is a key factor.
Bullets whizzed by Trump and hit a large lift behind him.
Posted on 7/28/24 at 9:34 am to Chad504boy
quote:
You continue to think you have a gotcha. Trump is on a 4 foot stage. The ground elevation is 3 feet higher than building. Aimed for trumps head. It’s an upward trajectory that clearly clears over all people you wrongly assume are in the way.
But bullets hit people behind Ttump as well as a big piece of machinery.
It would be easy to chart that if you had full access to the site.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News