This analysis is the second follow-up report and the first two should be consumed for the necessary contextual backdrop:
- TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: Initial Analysis Indicates Internal Security Breach and Stand-down
- TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: Follow-up Analysis/1
INTRODUCTION
The fire hose of misinformation, disinformation and malinformation has been opened-up all of the way to flood the post-assassination attempt landscape with one wild goose chase after another and so discernment is the first priority to filter-out everything designed to derail the actual fact set.
This was a known – it’s how these operations are conducted which is why the early analysis included “grassy knoll” considerations.
Therefore, some of the evidence included in this analysis is marked as unverified and so that evidence is considered but doesn’t impact findings until it’s validated.
In those cases, take it as you will knowing that any assumptions from unverified evidence are not made.
Note that contributors “Wall St.” and @MoonShanghai [X.com] continue to feed us with relevant information; Shanghai being especially helpful in developing the analysis on a second, additional shooter and that corresponding fact set and evidence.
I found this post to be an excellent synopsis and examination that also plugs-in additional details – it’s succinct and worthy:
AN ABSURD NARRATIVE
Acknowledging a whirlpool of misinformation, disinformation and malinformation infused with elements of the truth, determining a fully verifiable and accurate account of the Trump assassination attempt will be nearly impossible.
For two examples, consider that Americans are still waiting for the truth about JFK and 9/11.
This type of whirlpool information narrative is called a “limited hangout” and it’s a patented cover, conceal and exit strategy.
This analysis will position the evidence to demonstrate that we are already into the phase of operations for the cover-up [DHS OIG] of the cover-up [DOJ/FBI/Executive].
We’re in the same old and apparently inescapable territory of rinse/repeat.
The landscape has been flooded to impact the public’s perception in its collective understanding of the Trump assassination attempt.
Therein, Intelligence Community perception management operations [aka “psyops” or psychological operations] are in overdrive and the panic coming out DC is palpable because just like “they” didn’t expect Hillary Clinton to lose in 2016, “they” didn’t expect the snipers to miss Trump on 13 Jul 24.
The snipers’ miss ripped the landscape in half because conducting cover and concealment operations on the back end of a successful Executive assassination attempt is on an entirely different continent that covering and concealing a failed Executive assassination attempt where the Executive is the presumptive winner of the coming election; and where his Mar-a-Lago estate was already raided to recapture the declassified evidence of the criminality serving in part as motive for the attempt because when the missed target returns to the Executive Office, he recaptures every single ounce of Constitutional authority and power to hold the perpetrators fully accountable to the fullest extent of the law, which means the death sentence.
Two different continents and the panic is real.
To think that we’re not already neck deep in the kill or be killed phase is perhaps more naive and idiotic than what is presented in this meme below.
Discount the OSHA bit that was included for humor’s sake.
They bank on a dumbed down American public overloaded with misinformation, disinformation and malinformation to believe a scenario essentially exactly like that above.
And it works even to the extent that there are lunatics now saying that Trump staged his own assassination for political purposes.
That’s how dumb these people are and you can’t argue with stupid or emotions and especially both, which has been the case with Orange Man Bad since 2015.
That’s how perception management operations work and they were perfected for decades in the Middle East.
One of my associates and teammates ran those operations [Brian O’Shea.]
Returning to the Crooks/AGR rooftop, consider this side-by-side image as entirely destructive to the narrative put forth by the USSS and Dir. Kimberly Cheatle, where the AGR building/Crooks rooftop is featured on the left and the USSS counter-sniper teams on the right:
USSS Dir. Kimberly Cheatle said, “there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof.”
Here’s a question for Dir. Cheatle: Would you also leave ground – terra firma – with an identical slope to the Crooks’/AGR rooftop unsecured because of “safety.”
I didn’t think so.
Another question for the Director: Can you explain how the USSS counter-sniper occupied and steeper slope is safer than the flatter slope you said was unsafe for other counter-snipers?
I didn’t think so.
The obvious point is that by design, the USSS counter-sniper team was tactically positioned on a rooftop with a greater slope than the one deliberately, intentionally and also by design left unsecured with no rooftop presence because of “safety.”
To gain access to the AGR building, Crooks reportedly brought and used a ladder [image from the previous analysis].
The initial push of information included the details above regarding Crooks’ ladder and now, a second ladder has been introduced to the dialogue to augment a second vehicle [van], a third vehicle [bicycle], a second alternative shooter [Yearick], a second additional shooter [water tower or similar location], two additional weapons fired [forensic acoustic analysis] and a second patsy [the “My name is Thomas Matthew Crooks” video from the initial analysis.’
The second ladder is examined below.
LENS FOR UNDERSTANDING
Our lens to begin understanding a factual account of the Trump assassination attempt is an elementary one.
As the evidence and analysis is further consumed, with each new piece, ask one question: If they consistently lie about the smaller details inside the broader fact set, what does that say about the broader fact set itself and more importantly, the narrative borne out of that fact set that is being propagated as the explanation for the assassination attempt?
In other words, Occam’s tells us that if they are lying about all of the smaller details it’s because they’re lying about the entire explanation.
There are new developments since the initial analysis and the first follow-up.
NEW DEVELOPMENTS
New developments and developments within existing positions include:
- Trump attends RNC in Milwaukee
- US Secret Service considerations go straight to the top [Dir. Kimberly Cheatle]
- A second ladder, different ladders
- A second vehicle, the van
- A second, additional shooter, the water tower
- Forensic acoustics, 3 weapons
- Stand-down, Crooks on radar for hours
- AGR/Crooks building was LEO staging area
- DHS/FBI Projected retaliation
- A compromised DHS
- The cover-up of the cover-up
- Crooks’ premiere
- More on Crooks
- Dan Bongino
NEW DEVELOPMENTS – ANALYSIS & EVIDENCE
1-THE RNC
A changed man appeared at the RNC and here’s his entrance:
2-USSS & DIRECTOR KIMBERLY CHEATLE
USSS Dir. Kimberly Cheatle cites “safety” and a “sloped roof” as the reasons to not secure the Crooks’ rooftop:
We covered the remaining broader implications in the above section on the narrative.
3-THE SECOND LADDER
New evidence has emerged to impact the evidence about the ladder Crooks allegedly used to access the AGR rooftop.
It was said to be this, which has now reportedly been attributed to LEO’s access to the roof:
Here is another similar image sourced from Gateway Pundit where the analysis contained in it is virtually identical to what I summarized the day before in the above graphic and discussed in detail in the first follow-up analysis.
There is no explanation for why the above image contains “Saddam Hussein” in the bottom right.
From the same source:
From the above picture, a 5-foot ladder would be effective from the vantage point of the resin storage unit to the right of the commercial door with a height of approximately 6’8″.
Presumably, the ladder would be used to get atop the storage unit and then be pulled-up to use again to access the roof.
This still needs further development.
4-THE VAN
Although Crooks was stated to have driven his Hyundai Sonata to the event; to have parked outside the event; and to have taken the remaining 3 blocks to the perimeter on his bicycle; there are reports of a van with Arizona plates being towed away and attributed to Crooks although the reports don’t evidence the Crooks tie-in or state exactly how [for example, title of ownership and registration through those same Arizona plates.]
Consider this interview relative to the remarks made in this post, which reads:
“SUSPECT’S VAN”: Crooks’ either drove a van AND his car while toting along his bicycle, a 10 ft. ladder, ammo, explosives, a remote switch, his phone, a spotting scope and his rifle OR he had an accomplice[s] to pull-off the inside job the USSS permitted him/them to do OR the van is totally unrelated, but then why towed? Occam’s dictates that it’s accomplices and Crooks as a likely patsy.
Drove his Sonata but drove his van, with Arizona plates although he’s from Bethel Park?
Borrowed a rifle but bought a 5-ft ladder that was actually a 10 ft ladder?
Brought two vehicles but also brought his bike… that he rode to the scene… with his 10 ft. ladder, ammo, a remote switch, a spotting scope, his phone and his rifle?
The fire hose is on and we will be inundated with misinformation, disinformation and malinformation to make the waters as murky and muddy as possible.
The emerging fact sets about Crooks and his methodology and assets is absurdly unbelievable. When they holler “look here,” look over there.
The more variables they introduce with Crooks the more likely he is the patsy that he already appears to be; and less attention and examination is available for alternative theories and positions.
All by design.
This needs further development and something to substantiate the tie-in of the van to Crooks whether directly or indirectly and for example through revelations that the van is attributed to a Crooks accomplice[s].
Occam’s tells us that little information is to be found about the van and any ties to Crooks because it implicates an accomplice[s].
The accomplice[s] theory is a better explanation for the established fact set than the position of Crooks as lone shooter.
The accomplice[s] theory is also a better explanation for how Crooks could be moved into position to become the patsy as the evidence indicates that he likely is.
5-THE SECOND, ADDITIONAL SHOOTER
ShanghaiMoon contributes to the development of the second/additional shooter analysis.
For review and including an additional image, here are on-site overheads and diagrams:
This is Crooks to Trump:
This is USSS counter-snipers to Crooks.
The on-site water tower is thought to be the plausible location for a second, additional shooter [previous analysis].
This provides a panoramic view to give perspective on the water tower relative to the site, event stage and Trump’s location.
If there were no USSS presence in the water tower meaning it, too, was not secured, that would be a significant detail to more severely aggravate the existing fact set surrounding on-site Executive protection and the establishment of an effective and routinely procedural 3-layered perimeter that captures all high ground, which constitutes the primary thesis for the analysis here.
The other consideration would be this: The analysis clearly indicates an inside job and if it can be factually determined that shots came from an additional shooter located in the water tower and the USSS [or LEO] was the only individual in the water tower, Occam’s prevails to indicate that the shots came from him to an evidenced absence of anyone else.
If that bears-out, ballistic analysis on all weapons located in the water tower at the time of the event should confirm it.
Otherwise, it’s another scenario where like Crooks on the roof of the building designated for LEO staging and controlled by LEO on the inside, a second shooter accessed the water tower unbeknownst to any USS/LEO officer occupying it.
Or, it’s a scenario where only one shooter/sniper occupied the water tower as reported by eyewitnesses; and where USSS counter-snipers are said to have returned fire in the direction of the water tower to dispatch the shooter; and this occurred in breach of strict Executive protection protocol ceding high ground but where there is no body or story in the official narrative to go along with the eyewitness accounts.
Here are several eyewitness interviews alleging a second, additional shooter:
Referring to the USSS counter-sniper, the eyewitness in the second video states, “He killed the gentleman in the water tower.”
Was that gentleman USSS, LEO or third-party and for instance a Crooks accomplice?
Or was that gentleman a third party to on-site USSS, LEO and Crooks meaning he was an asset of the architects and dispatched to eliminate the evidence of him and his testimony?
Obviously, the water tower/second, additional shooter details are significant and require further development.
6-THE FORENSIC ACOUSTICS
@MoonShanghai contributed to the development of this analysis and provided the sources.
Possible evidence in support of an additional shooter[s] is found in forensic acoustics that indicate as many as three weapons being fired; however, it’s not entirely clear how many are or will be attributed to return fire from the USSS/LEO.
Here’s another example of the acoustics:
*Link
7-THE USSS STAND-DOWN
The immediate and initial analysis positioned the Trump assassination attempt as a deliberate stand-down to a shooter identified by presence and location to the USSS in advance of the shooting.
It’s now an accepted fact set that becomes more severely aggravated by an additional details.
Here is another additional fact set, which states, “According to a new report by Fox News, Thomas Matthew Crooks’ parents called law enforcement to report concerns about their son in the hours leading up to the attempted assassination of President Trump.”:
USSS policy and procedure dictates that the report by Crooks’ parents would have flowed directly to the USSS meaning that it had an hours-long advanced notice of a plausible and potential shooter in the near vicinity with a capable rifle, who happened to be photographed and officially “called” in to the same USSS as a potential subject no less that thirty minutes before the first shots were fired.
Standard USSS procedure considerations could have pre-empted the entire assassination scenario by delaying the event based upon receipt of the initial report from hours earlier until the matter and the individual identified as Crooks were both fully under USSS control.
Bongino will speak to this below.
That didn’t happen because this was an operation and doing so would have eliminated the entire cover and narrative for it.
Occam’s dictates that people don’t publicly attempt to assassinate other people and then tell the truth about it; in fact, it’s the exact opposite where concealment and cover-up are standard operations.
After law enforcement encountered this same individual identified as Crooks on the AGR rooftop and then retreated, Crooks was permitted by USSS to then advance on Trump and to fire no fewer than three rounds before any USSS response of any kind occurred to include USSS counter-sniper fire.
As positioned in the immediate/initial analysis, the USSS stood-down to Crooks.
Full stop.
8-THE LEO STAGING AREA/AGR
Astonishingly [not really], the rooftop Crooks came to occupy was the staging area for law enforcement.
This would be the equivalent of a shooter executing a mass shooting in a downtown area of a major city from the rooftop of police headquarters.
The narrative is ridiculously stupid.
A generally reliable source of information in Mike Adams @HealthRanger has introduced another vector [sent by @EvilHatesTruth] in the Crooks rooftop/AGR analysis that potentially explains why the rooftop was left unoccupied by a USSS counter-sniper team that Bongino will later say instead opted to position itself in a second-story window.
Bongino will also cite this counter-sniper team to be LEO, not USSS.
A rooftop shot from any such USSS counter-sniper at Trump would be obvious from such an exposed position but from the concealment of a second story window, this is viable.
If this account is verified and the counter-sniper team that fired on Trump is LEO, rather than USSS as Adams contends, it means the internal security breach directly encompasses those agencies and the politically corrupt state of Pennsylvania.
This requires further development.
9-PROJECTED RETALIATION
In the initial analysis, I positioned this:
The following day, the projection began growing legs relative to the customary modus operandi of leveraging pretext as an operational mechanism and where this is by all appearances pretext:
In the joint advisory, DHS/FBI warned of “potential follow-on or retaliatory acts of violence” at “locations like political rallies and campaign events.”
This is something to closely monitor moving forward and in the event something catastrophic occurs, which is now both highly plausible and highly likely, it will be imperative to immediately begin collecting, archiving and backing-up as much primary source evidence as possible.
10-A COMPROMISED DHS
Prior to 13 Jul 24, the examination of DHS was long and arduous and it permits us to maintain the assumption that DHS under Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is compromised.
Otherwise, Mayorkas would not be actively engaged to obfuscate and detract from the investigation into the Trump assassination attempt by the House Oversight Committee; reneging on his promise to brief its members.
Recall from the early analysis that USSS is an agency of DHS and all indications are that this is an inside USSS/DHS job; and so Mayorkas’ posture is what we would expect to see.
11-THE COVER-UP OF THE COVER-UP
Remember that investigations [prosecutions] are conducted for 1 of 2 reasons: to expose and prosecute or to conceal and cover-up.
The initial analysis positioned Biden’s ordered FBI investigation into the Trump assassination attempt in the category of the latter constituting the beginning of the Intelligence Community’s [the architects] concealment and cover-up operations.
Subsequently, the DHS Inspector General announced the beginning of its investigation in response to what the analysis brands as the misinformation, disinformation and malinformation narrative being propagated.
Note that others are beginning to assemble the same positions in the citation of “”intentional” failure”: “In the wake of Saturday’s attempted assassination of Donald Trump, the #1 question is how the Secret Service could have failed to secure a rooftop a little over 400ft away – which former Army sniper Rep. Cory Mills called a “sniper’s paradise” that was so obvious he wondered aloud whether it was an “intentional” failure.
Projecting forward, the likely outcome of any DHS Inspector General report on the Trump assassination attempt will be James Comey like.
Comey assumed a posture to cite that “no reasonable prosecutor” would charge Hillary Clinton over her emails in his declination to prosecute.
Comey anecdotally raked Clinton through the coals to air out the evidence of culpability and criminality before doing nothing about it and in ways constituting a cover-up.
Any DHS IG report would read similarly in laying-out all of the USSS culpability and then falling just short of a necessary threshold to do anything meaningful about it; constituting a cover-up.
More precisely, it would be the DHS IG cover-up of the cover-up from Biden and the FBI.
12-CROOKS’ PREMIERE
USSS and FBI state that Crooks left a likely foreshadowing message in advance:
Fox News’s Jacqui Heinrich now reveals Secret Service and FBI officials told U.S. senators during an all-members briefing on Wednesday that Crooks allegedly wrote a chilling message on the gaming platform “Steam” just days before the attempted assassination.
According to these officials, Crooks wrote: “July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds.”
13-MORE ON CROOKS
The following both confirm and augment our understanding of Crooks the individual:
Initially, mental illness and psychotropic drugs were considered and now there is a developing story line to that effect that can be read about here.
This is unconfirmed and unverified but if true, would extend to the above mental health considerations:
*Link
If that photo is confirmed to be Crooks, it speaks to the modus operandi of mentally ill individuals being co-opted as patsies at the same time it validates considerations in the Nashville Covenant School shooting.
14-DAN BONGINO
I’ve still to consume any other person’s analysis on the Trump assassination attempt aside from the information included in the analysis here as evidence.
This includes anything from Dan Bongino, whom I recommended sourcing in the immediate analysis for reliable information through the USSS lens – Bongino is formerly USSS on Executive protection detail.
Here Bongino confirms existing positions and in the first, he cites the 2nd floor window positioning of the counter-sniper team, which he further clarifies as LEO, not USSS.
That conflicting information needs further development and here’s Bongino in worthy short segments.
I’m listening to Bongino’s remarks for the first time as I write and they are exactly what was anticipated relative to the aggregate analysis: the internal security breach is top-down relative to an apparently designed stand-down.
Overlay Bongino’s remarks against the existing analysis and this from Butler Township stating that “saying the officers involved had radioed a warning on a “blanket tactical channel” about the gunman.”:
USSS was in stand-down mode.
Full stop.
FINAL REMARKS
Acknowledging the revisions to the position on the Crooks ladder made in light of new information and images, the balance of the analysis continues to build from its initial positions with further evidence to those ends.
The evidence and positions on shooter identities and the additional emerging evidence of an apparent second, additional shooter is the first priority expecting links back to the USSS or DHS or FBI or some combination of those.
It’s the reason this report has used “snipers” instead of “sniper” throughout.
The second priority is identifying the cast for the internal security breach starting with Director Cheatle and moving down the tree to the lower hanging fruit.
Please stay tuned for Follow-Up Analysis/3.
-End-
Leave a Reply