This analysis is the FIFTH follow-up report.
The initial two-day archive of real-time and relevant immediate analysis, social media posts and information supports the aggregate analysis: ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT ON TRUMP.
The aggregate analysis on the Trump assassination attempt works to: 1-limit the focus of examination to primary positions with 2-support by primary and secondary source evidence by 3-identifying and factoring-out misinformation, disinformation and malinformation in ways to 4-permit Occam’s to prevail in order to 5-determine a reliable fact set to 6-reflect the truth about the event.
ShanghiaMoon @MoonShangai, “Wall St.,” Marco Polo members and others contribute to the ongoing analysis.
The first five reports should be consumed for necessary contextual backdrop:
- TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: Initial Analysis Indicates Internal Security Breach and Stand-down
- TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: Follow-up Analysis/1
- TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: Follow-up Analysis/2
- TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: Follow-up Analysis/3
- TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: Follow-up Analysis/4
This report breaks the previous format to deliver the analysis in one narrative.
ANALYSIS
As established, we’re in the phase of operations where there are cover-ups of ongoing cover-ups.
Consider what USSS Director Kimberly Cheatle testified to today: there are is an internal USSS investigation, a criminal FBI investigation, a number of OIG investigations, and the external investigation the president ordered.
The following illustrations explain how and why the investigative process, aka the truth-finding mission, is so layered and complex.
It’s what you do to make things go away.
The first depicts the opposite of what they’re doing with the Trump assassination attempt – compartmentalizing – and for an example of that, examine Joe Biden and what they’re doing to him, which is making his container go away.
What all will they put in it, first?.
The second depicts what they’re doing with this multi-layered, overlapping and complex investigative process: disaggregating the culpability and severe criminal exposure to obfuscate and obstruct in avoidance of attribution and prosecution.
Here’s a deep explanation the removal of Joe which was projected in January 2023 and speaks directly to compartmentalization for the purposes of getting rid of the container: Enjoy the Show. Biden Compartmentalized for the Flush.
They are disaggregating the totality of the evidence into department and agency containers for different interpretations where the investigative findings are certain to conflict to some degree in key domains and specifics; and to a necessary threshold in order to arrive at a best-case scenario of “inconclusive” summary findings and a worst-case scenario of “incompetence in planning and execution.”
It will be the James Comey “no reasonable prosecutor” treatment for Hillary Clinton all over again.
Moreover and as this follow-up has taken several days to compile and write, the developments continue to roll in such as the compartmentalization and resignation of USSS Director Kimberly Cheatle:
To think that Cheatle’s resignation is organic is a mistake and through the right lens, the evidence indicates this was always the plan.
As this rats nest of investigations move forward, what they won’t find is a fulsome, complete and factual account of the truth.
Adhering to the “limited hangout” exit strategy, each of the summary findings from each of the departments and agencies will contain considerable amounts of truth and accuracy where they overlap, which is required to make the embedded misinformation, disinformation and malinformation palatable and consumable.
Here’s one good example of this from Tucker Carlson and Joe Posobiec, where I contend that the latter is engaged in limited hangout strategy:
Posobiec is on air to read a script appearing as less than expert and to my point, he makes these points, which are patently erroneous on their face and poison the truthful facts presented along with them in limited hangout format:
-Posobiec claims Crooks, whose marksman skills are suspect, used iron sights instead of optics to make an impossible first shot and further complicates his own fraudulent narrative by his subsequent account of the shooter’s movements in the immediate run-up to shooting. Posobiec claims that Crooks declined optics in an effort to control and lower his profile and reduce his silhouette in the prone shooting position. He says that by adding optics to his rifle, Crooks would have increased his profile. This is absurd. Mounting any optics to a rifle results in the optic aligning with the shooter’s dominant eye. In all cases, the top of the shooter’s head is still the apex of the profile and siholoutte and as the highest point, it’s still going to eclipse the optic. This is all complete nonsense, implausible and entirely unbelievable given the aggregate video evidence and other evidence available relative to Crooks’ behaviors and movements before the shooting. Crooks was operating in the wide open in broad daylight and reducing his profile as a consideration is in total conflict with that evidence and the following. This image destroys Posobiec and makes him far less than an expert because affixing optics to ones rifle does not impact the shooter profile at all:
Occam’s indicates that Crooks’ weapon choice of an AR-15 styled “assault weapon” from his father’s collection was by design to accommodate the gun control narrative put forth in the immediate analysis.
It’s a matter of his father’s rifle simply not having optics and it didn’t matter for the poor marksman Crooks, because his role is that of patsy while Trump’s targeting was assigned to internal assets [USSS/LEO personnel] leaving room for unidentified outside assets like possible accomplices to Crooks, etc.
-Posobiec cites Crooks’ encounter with LEO where the officer retreated and where Posobiec suggests that between that event and Crooks’ supposed shooting of the first three rounds, Crooks had been on the move and not stationary in a prone shooting position. This conflicts with two things: two conflicting images of Crooks in a prone shooting position [in two different locations and where he is deceased in the first one] and the acoustic forensic evidence. If Crooks’ fired at all, it was the second burst of rounds in much more erratic fashion and not shots 1-3. Shots 1-3 are very controlled with a consistent intervals in between shots evidencing that they came from a highly skilled marksman [counter-sniper] who missed the kill shot only by inches and only because of a head turn by Trump. Otherwise and according to evidence and modeling, that round enters Trump’s right eye and with angularity exits the back of his head. Crooks didn’t take that shot and if he didn’t it was impossible for him to have taken shots 2-3. It is highly unlikely and implausible; if not impossible, that Crooks took shots 1-3 if he encountered law enforcement immediately before shooting, which would illicit an uncontrollable adrenaline release causing an increase in heart and respiration rates that interferes with the ability to calm and steady oneself as is requisite in medium to long range shooting. Breathing rate control is a fundamental component to sniper training and shooter mechanics. Posobiec’s claims say Crooks was on the move in the moments before the shooting and this would further increase his heart and respiration rates before he assumed a prone position and fired so precisely while using no optics and instead relying on iron sights to shoot from a football field plus 40 yards away. That never happend as stated. Moreover, there are no acoustic fingerprints evidencing shot echoes for shots 1-3 and this indicates that they were taken from an interior room, which conceal the echoes.
-Posobiec claims that USSS counter-snipers did not engage Crooks because they may have thought he was personnel from an outside LEO on the Executive protection detail. Once again, this is complete and utter nonsense that is implausible and entirely unbelievable with even a modicum of understanding about USSS Executive protection, so Posobiec is either no expert or he’s sowing narrative; I contend it’s both and for these reasons. LEO counter-sniper positions would have been indicated on the grid cards carried by counter-sniper teams that include ranges and distances tied to geographic, infrastructure and architectural landmarks. Any LEO counter-sniper would be in an appropriate kit/uniform and therefore easily identifiable. In addition to a quick radio check to positively ID for LEO, counter-snipers deploy a wide range of optics [scopes, binoculars, etc.] that would facilitate immediate recognition and identification of Crooks as an unknown subject; but in Crooks case, as a known subject of interest; and certainly not LEO. Posobiec neglects to mention that USSS counter-sniper teams were positioned immediately over Crooks alleged AGR rooftop location concealed behind second story windows and they were as close as 40 yards to Crooks, who would have been identifiable in plain view without optics. This is especially so given that Crooks had been identified and called-in before the event including distribution of an image of Crooks. Posobiec fully neglects to mention Executive protection training against internal threats, such as any compromised USSS/LEO personnel attached to the detail. Posobiec fully neglects to mention that STANDARD POLICY, PROTOCOL and PROCEDURE in Executive protection detail and especially on the 2-man counter-sniper teams is that in the instance an unknown subject trains a weapon on the Executive, HE IS DISPATCHED IMMEDIATELY. CROOKS WAS ALREADY KNOWN WITH A WEAPON TRAINED ON THE EXECUTIVE. HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISPATCHED IMMEDIATELY. FULL STOP.
Occam’s reduces the fact set to a deliberate stand-down to a known patsy with internal assets tasked to eliminate the target.
In each of these cases, Posobiec is sowing ridiculous narrative points for his principal, which by all indications is the Intelligence Community given his background as a Naval intelligence officer [reserves] and subsequently continuing on in a similar capacity as a civilian.
Posobiec is doing this in order to move non-critical thinkers to desired positions.
Carlson knows this otherwise Posobiec’s statements wouldn’t have gone unchecked because they should have been shredded to bits as they just were.
Posobiec’s claims should be dismissed because they are implausible, unlikely and in some instances impossible; not to mention they conflict with the evidence, and this makes Posobiec an asset engaged in limited hangout tactics to poison otherwise relaible fact sets with mis-, dis- and malinformation.
This is the type of mis-, dis- and malinformation that is designed to poison the fact sets being introduced into the myriad investigations now ongoing in cover and concealment operations.
If there is cohesion in all of the summary findings from the paralleling investigations and those findings don’t comport with the fact sets and evidence as both are now understood and reported by off-reservation analysts and reporters, it will be a full indicator of the cited cover-up operations.
What’s being covered-up includes no fewer than three confirmed shooters by means of three confirmed and distinctly different rounds of shots; each from varying distances with unique acoustic fingerprints.
That alone eviscerates the “lone gunman” narrative while necessitating the slow-drip introduction of accomplice[s].
The narrative/MSM attributes the first three shots to Crooks and this analysis assigns them to an internal asset counter-sniper for the reasons stated.
The forensic acoustic analysis for shot echoes on the first three shots is critical because it does not contain acoustic fingerprints for echoes indicating that shots 1-3 were fired from an interior room.
That data point alone eviscerates the entire narrative account of the totality of shots fired and the attributions for them.
In conjunction with Shanghai Moon @MoonsShangai, THE IMPOSSIBLE FIRST SHOT graphics were published indicating the most plausible origins of that shot.
Logical deduction and carefully examined evidence indicate one plausible origin for THE IMPOSSIBLE FIRST SHOT and not by coincidence, it vectors directly to an interior room thought to be occupied by counter-snipers but where there are conflicting reports as to whether they were USSS or outside LEO.
By process of elimination and according to the shot trajectories determined by vectoring backwards towards the point of origin, all but one plausible origin site is eliminated: the window beneath the initial Crooks rooftop position in the AGR building.
Subsequently and remarkably, another slow-drip operational narrative point has been introduced to provide visual evidence [if reliable and not constructed, manipulated or altered; and the same would apply to the first image showing a different location] of a second Crooks shooting location depicted as being all of the way to the end [left end from viewer’s perspective, right end from Crooks’ perspective].
It bears a few questions:
1-Did counter-snipers permit Crooks to move from his shooting position after he fired [if he fired at all] and if so, why, because that would be a full breach of training, protocol and procedure?
2-If they did not wait for Crooks to move, then how did they intervene according to training, protocol and procedure to shoot and eliminate him where the body is evidenced to be positioned on the opposite side of the building?
3-How did Crooks’ rifle get so far from his body if Crooks were shooting from that spot in the prone position when the USSS counter-sniper eliminated him with a “one in a million” shot as described; and where he that stated he could barely see Crooks’ head over the ridge line of the roof, according to the narrative?
4-How can the narrative be true if Crooks, who shot from the far right, ended up dead on the left of the AGR roof?
Logical deduction and Occam’s tell us someone [everyone] is lying somewhere [everywhere].
Considerations:
1-Crooks best vantage point is to the far right – less obstructive view but less cover and more exposure – and he likely shot from there.
2-Crooks was not killed in the location from which he shot [right side] or Crooks was permitted to move at some point after shooting [back to the left side] or Crooks surveyed from the right, then moved to the left and then shot where he was killed [and did he take his rifle with him or leave it in one location or the other, etc.?
3-If Crooks left it and moved back to it, how and why not did the USSS/LEO intercede to dispatch or otherwise control him before he was permitted to regain possession of the rifle to advance on the Executive, convert to a prone position, steady his rifle, aim and fire-off three shots with sniper like precision and perfect interval timing?
4-How did Crooks do that after an adrenalin rush from having just unexpectedly encountered LEO on a ladder to compound his already elevated heart and respiratory rates?
5-How did Crooks do that as a poor marksman with no optics from that distance?
6-How did all of that occur with USSS/LEO so close by with Crooks in their plain sight?
7-If Crooks were permitted to move, then he had to have been shot and killed in his post-shot exit back from the right to the left.
8-If Crooks moved, he would have violated considerations for profiling and siholouetting himself that he supposedly controlled by electing to not have optics, which doesn’t matter anyways because of basic human anatomy of the head?
9-Video evidence has Crooks ascending to the AGR rooftop without the ladder in view and then army crawling in the direction of the viewer’s right location where his body was photographed and so, where are the images and photographs of Crooks moving in between the two supposedly and generally left and right side locations?
10-Is it because the video being released in bits an pieces; always cutting off at the moment to be most revealing, are a part of slow-drip operations to control the narrative? [That’s exactly what it is].
11-If Crooks were exiting back to the left side where his body is captured in both images and video; and although it might begin to explain how his rifle could have moved away from him as he fell to the roof from his feet as opposed to being in the prone position, Crooks is facing in the wrong direction to be exiting where he would have been running parallel to the ridge/roofline and not in the prone position 90-degrees to that and facing perpendicular to the ridge, which is toward the target?
12-Or was Crooks dispatched from surveying on the right and moving back to his weapon on the left, coming up short before reaching the rifle and thereby eliminating Crooks as a shooter at all.
13-If Crooks is eliminated as a shooter, that means acoustic forensics evidence three shooters and where all three are plausibly and certainly internal assets.
14-Were is the evidence and reporting on the ballistics including but not limited to all spent shell casings, any collected rounds or round fragments and every weapon in the overarching Executive protection detail to rule in or out each one?
15-Is one or more of the images produced of Crooks on the rooftop digitally altered, manipulated or just fake altogether?
16-As with the evidence in THE IMPOSSIBLE FIRST SHOT, variables have to be factored in or out to make the narrative work.
None of the Crooks/lone gunman narrative is believable and the more variables they continue to introduce in slow-drip operations, the longer and harder it is in getting to the truth.
Take those questions and considerations in application to these illustrations of THE IMPOSSIBLE FIRST SHOT.
Notably and in each position, Crooks is covered from above or below by USSS/LEO counter-sniper teams providing a paralleling [interchangeable] trajectories in service to the narrative.
“Lone gunman” Crooks is the IC explanatory narrative with slow-drip operations to suggest an accomplice[s] in efforts to further muddy the waters.
Only off-reservation reporters and analysts are laying it out beyond the narrative to examine as much as possible to establish counter-narrative positions that are well-evidenced.
The Carlson/Posobiec segment evidences this.
The miss changed the world and it’s caused palpable panic because THEY NEVER EXPECTED THEM TO MISS.
Panic looks like this:
The palpable panic is indicative of the level to which the people are beginning to discern the truth and the closer to that truth we get, the closer to WWIII we will get.
As I said to Wall St. recently about the post-assassination landscape, “It’s no different than playing cards…. high card wins…. one of the few things that can trump an assassination [or attempt] is a war. No pun intended.”
Did you notice the immediate uptick in the war narrative following the missed attempt because it was as palpable as the panic?
We’re now seeing the confluence of generational and contemporary timelines merge where the operations within them overlay, overlap and reciprocate in increasing degrees.
To begin, we must revisit World War III considerations, where WWIII will have begun in lockstep with an incoming Biden Administration in late December 2020.
We do this for important reasons stated below.
The analysis, which is predicated on examination of the 30 Mar 1981 Reagan assassination within roughly the first three months of his first term, projected World War III in three specific theaters [Russia/Ukraine, China/Taiwan/South China Sea and the Middle East/Iran/Syria/et al] in Dec. 2020 after the incoming Biden Administration issued a foreign policy shift [explained in this series: War, Famine & Disease.]
Biden was positioned to do so as an extension of the Obama Administration and as an operator occupying the Executive during the COVID-19 “pandemic,” which was leveraged to steal the 2020 election and install him.
That all draws back to 1963, George H.W. Bush and his entrance into CIA informally, before formally attaching and then ascending to its directorship; going on to become VPOTUS under Reagan and then a one-term POTUS himself.
GHWB’s CIA footprint in the removal of JFK and Nixon and the attempted removal of Reagan is no coincidence; he’s the head of the Intelligence Community snake that is constricting this nation to death before unhinging its jaw to consume it whole as snakes do.
All of these mainline domains of analysis are now merging in confluence to deliver the resulting and designed outcome of WWIII, which has a projected kinetic flashpoint date of 05 Nov 24 +/- 3-months.
Consider:
They’re bringing the cauldron to a full boil: failed assassination attempt, cover-ups on going, Biden out, Harris backed, August DNC for a new nominee and World War III to make all of the criminality and treason of the past decades disappear forever.
The failed assassination attempt CHANGED EVERYTHING and the contingencies have to go down the hierarchy of the deck of cards remembering that all of this has already been tried to the opposite of the desired effects: 1-Years-long propagandized character assassination, 2-fraudulent “Russia, Russia, Russia!”, 3-FISA spying, 4-Robert Mueller Special Counsel, 5-Impeachment 1, 6-Fake pandemic, 7-Stolen 2020 election, 8-Capitol “insurrection” entrapment operation, 9-Mar-a-Lago raid entrapment operation, 10-Operational lawfare prosecutions & lawsuits, 11-Impeachment 2 and 13-Jack Smith Special Counsel [and that’s an incomplete list.]
The only card that’s left is WWIII because it’s the only card that trumps an assassination; especially a failed assassination attempt and the Intelligence Community is desperately trying to deflect away from it.
THEY NEVER EXPECTED THEM TO MISS and “THEY” is the Intelligence Community/DHS/USSS/DOJ/FBI/Executive/HPSCI/SSCI and specifically, the shadowy cohort within that architecture this is responsible for the USSS internal security breach and stand-down to a patsy sniper while internal asset counter-snipers were deployed and tasked with the assassination attempt on Trump.
“THEM” refers to the teams of tasked internal asset counter-snipers and other co-conspirators.
Consequently, the back-end plans are much different now and there is a mad scramble to re-stack the deck of cards in their favor causing the aforementioned panic and insane landscape.
With an absent Joe Biden and presumptive altrnative leadership of the country [it’s been Obama this entier time], it’s rule by fear, chaos and terror and it’s fuled by mis-, dis- and malinformation.
Otherwise Biden wouldn’t have resigned his nomination on cue exactly and precisely as projected in January 2023.
Consider these relative to the analysis on the architecture:
Here’s the first: TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT: “James O’Keefe @JamesOKeefeIII @OKeefeMedia, I tried to tell you back in May that you uncovered more than you know: “INSIDER THREAT.” Did you consider if Trump were designated an “INSIDER THREAT” to authorize his classified assassination? “Through our lens, the importance of O’Keefe’s remarks on how the IC’s CMC “cuts across ALL OF THE CIA’S MISSION AREAS” can’t be overstated for the utilitarian, operational and tactical value it provides.” Where else was “insider threat” critical to operations? In the COVID-19 “pandemic” construct of enterprise fraud. Explained: https://politicalmoonshine.com/2024/05/08/cias-insider-threat-program-okeefe-media-group-recording-more-important-than-people-realize/“
The second: “TRUMP ASSASSINATION HYPOTHETICAL: What if the IC/DHS/DOJ designated Trump a “domestic terrorist” & an “insider threat” following the Capitol “insurrection” entrapment operation? This is legal architecture that necessitates documentation even if it’s classified. That would mean documentation somewhere authorizing the legal elimination of the “insider threat” and “domestic terrorist” in order to protect “democracy” and the “Constitution.” Architects make sure everything fits. Who thinks a soon-to-be dead Joe Biden authorized it? And it failed. Whoops. And how there’s palpable panic. Who wants to bet that info is leaked at some point? Before that gets dismissed, these 83 items lay-out the architecture and the architects: https://politicalmoonshine.com/the-hunt-is-on/ Stack on top of that the assassination analysis contained in this thread with all articles/analysis: https://x.com/PoliticalMoons2/status/1813072752296816950 We’re dealing with exceptionally brilliant albeit evil people and let us not forget that on 05 Jan 17 in a holdover meeting in Obama’s Oval Office, everyone agreed it would be “by the book.” “Insider threat” and “domestic terrorist” are two pages out of that book. Susan Rice memorialized it in an email for an express purpose: to hold everyone publicly accountable. You found more than you know: @JamesOKeefeIII @OKeefeMedia .
This threaded post digs into the details with evidence and is recommended if you have time for it.
What O’Keefe doesn’t realize that he found is the highly plausible architecture for the assassination attempt on Trump that takes the entire premise of the War, Famine & Disease series where it intersects with the COVID-19 series and the Marco Polo/Hunter Biden Laptop series by relying on the entire premise of The Hunt Is On series [all linked in the menu bar].
If the positions on “insider threat” and “domestic terrorist” play-out as factual then hypothetically and in some form, there is documentation on the assassination attempt best described as making the case and the designation along with the evidence for them.
Whether that documentation is a product of DHS or DOJ or DOD or CIA or the National Security Council system as interfaced with the Executive as the Commander-in-Chief or a combination of those things remains to be seen, and so Occam’s tells us they’d do their best to disaggregate the evidence for the authorization and compartmentalize the authorization.
This is why the timing of Biden’s demise immediately after the attempt is so problematic – he’s a container for comparmentalization.
Evidence is manufactured for authorization by information laundering and by that, operatives like Joe Biden use their social media accounts to recurringly cite specific language with legal triggers like “domestic terrorist,” “threat,” “extremist” etc., the MSM picks-up on the quotes from “important people” and cites them in writing news stories aligned with those narratives.
The people releasing the narrative points are IC assets in official positions that have authority and jurisdiction overlapping and controling the agencies and departments with the authroity and jurisdiction to target Americans like Trump; and they often cite MSM news publications in their predicating and supporting case evidence.
Once properly predicated, those same agencies and departments make the authorization for constructed crimes of their own creation.
See the Capitol “insurrection” and Mar-a-Lago entrapment operations as but two examples.
It’s a highly effective, controlled and closed loop that launders narrative into an actionable product by using specific terms to trigger legal mechanisms for extra-constitutional authority.
Prosecutions and operational lawfare are different than assassinations and failed assassinations and so distinctions are in order.
Connecting any attempt on Trump to the “domestic terrorist” and “insider threat” requires something that could legally authorize it and that’s the crux of the position – it’s the one missing piece and so an argument is made to that end.
Any such authorization to assassinate a “domestic terrorist” of US citizenship is most likely contained in some form of Executive Order or Presidential Policy Directive noting that formally, the US does not engage in assassination.
Designating Trump a “domestic terrorist” and “insisder threat” whose “insider” position as a former and presumptive future Executive constitutes a highly aggravated scenario that could be painted as an “existential threat” to our “Constitution” and “democracy” as the narrative recites incessantly.
Therefore, in order to target Trump, that architecture must be built and acted on where it caused documentation as those processes do.
This would require a sign-off on authority to execute and Occam’s tells us that the most plausible signer is the Executive, whom the IC just packaged up for flushing.
If this were the case as overlaid by the Biden compartmentalization/flushing considerations; and now that we know the play is installing Kamala Harris as the interim nominee but only to contribute to the IC act of kabuki theater distracting the people until the DNC begins 19 Aug 24; and where Michelle Obama or Hillary Clinton will likely be installed without ever having campaigned, debated or endured the general public vetting process, it is unlikely Harris would have been read-in on the authorization process.
This would be to guarnatee plausible deniabilty if she were to become the nominee and now that card is on the table.
As known and where no direct authority could be found, any such authority would have to be entirely top secret and/or it’s provided by otherwise obtuse and vague language requiring one to infer the authority in totality of the circumstances if the case can be made.
By examining the O’Keefe thread, direct evidence of this indirect authority can be seen.
See “COUNTERTERRORISM” above?
Consider this relative to it and the genesis of the operations targeting Trump drawing back to 2015.
They used “domestic terrorist” and “insider threat” to build legal architecture to target Trump and it was borne out of the initial COUNTERINTELLIGENCE operations.
So when Obama said on 05 Jan 17 to do it “by the book,” I think that book could plausibly contain a last chapter covering assassination and Susan Rice may have memorialized it in a now public email to keep the stakeholder publicly in-check for a private and deadly agreement.
The authority would logically come from something similar to an a PPD or Presidential Policy Directives like these from Obama:
Here are Biden’s noting the change in nomenclature:
If the architects of the Trump assassination attempt are as asserted, we are dealing with known individuals with the modus operandi of conducting illegal operations not by doing them clandestinely and completely in the dark, but in broad daylight and in the full public specturm.
Rather than hiding their actions, their mode entails constructing a completely fraudulent public narrative to justify their very public actions carried out on authority they captured with the architecture they built; and they do it in ways to bend the blame for it all back onto their targets.
It was Trump’s fault they tried to kill him, in other words.
Their established mode serves another very important objective: If they were ever backed into a corner where the assassination attempt was attributed to them, the legal architecture they built becomes the foundation of their criminal defense predicated on national security and continuity of government considerations [“domestic terrorist” and “insider threat.”]
For anyone with lines to President Trump, his team or Don Jr., the “insider threat” and “domestic terrorist” designations should be a first point of close examination.
The layers and complexity of the ongoing cover-up operations are exactly what was positioned in the immediate, initial and early analysis; this from Update/2: “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.”
Consider the implications here as discussed, where if Trump were designated and targeted for the given reasons and even if it’s classified, there is documentation of the authorization.
Consider the timing of Biden’s statement on a “medical condition,” followed by the projected immediate “medical condition” that occurred, followed by the projected resignation from being the nominee that that occurred, to the projected death of Joe Biden that will occur.
If Biden authorized it and as Commander in Chief he must have, then they need him dead right now so they can compartmentalize the assassination attempt with him and get rid of it.
Importantly, this would be a back-end contingency plan meaning that any leak of evidence associating the assassination attempt with Biden as outlined, would be a last resort and that’s with the highest card in the deck already on the table: WWIII:
If others irrefutably make in important connections to prominent others like say Obama or Clinton, any such evidence of a Biden authorization would immediately leak to cleave the attempt away from and in attempt to salvage what’s left of the Democratic party.
Consider: “If I were the Intelligence Community & now that Joe Biden has been compartmentalized & flushed, I’d be looking real hard for the evidence [already in hand] tying Biden to the Trump assassination attempt. What a nice, neat & tidy exit package. What a giant, juicy, irresistible piece of fat to chew on for the People. Dems have real problems. One they just made go away. Will they dump the other into that container & make them both go away for good? Coming soon: Former President Joe Biden passes away never recovering from his COVID-19 infection [after they gave him Remdisivir?]. Later & before the election: Evidence links former President Joe Biden to the Trump assassination attempt. A shiny new nominee, a little fake “Go Blue!,” a make believe pendulum swing, no time left on the clock & one stolen election and from there, it’s business as usual. That card has to be on the table. Not the best option, but has to be in play for consideration.”
If that evidence does in fact exist, then the IC’s first priority is to make sure it never sees the light of day unless they need it to.
That bears down on the next finer distinction in all of this: if Trump returns to the Executive, he returns to the power to unilaterally declassify anything he wants within reason and his attempted assassins should be the first order of business.
That has to be what they’re thinking and if one is looking for a proper motive to assassinate an Executive, that’s it: self-preservation.
Self-preservation fuels institutional preservation when the institutions are compromised by the compromised people running them; and the Executive, Legislative, Judicial and Intelligence institutions all qualify.
The truth about JFK should be Trump’s second priority in evidence of his first and to set the timeline to the present.
It’s important to provide the evidence and explanations of the truth in ways to make them consumable and so, any such release should be sequential so that any current releases are informed by previous ones and so on; and theefore, the Obamagate/Russiagate/FISA evidence should be third.
The truth about the entrapment operations of the Capitol “insurrection” and the Mar-a-Lago raid should be fourth.
The truth about the fake “pandemic” to steal the 2020 election should be fifth.
The truthful account of 9/11 should be his sixth to begin the back-fill.
The truth about RFK and MLK should be seventh.
The Clinton[s] evidence should be eighth.
The Epstein client list should be tenth to provide appropriate motive for all of the above.
Then, the rest of it noting I probably omitted something[s] from that list.
For all of these reasons and for the reasons held in the aggregate analysis, the operational misinformation, disinformation and malinformation is at maximum flow to prevent the truth at all costs; even if that means WWIII.
Consider the obstructive and remarkably vague testimony of USSS Director Kimberly Cheatle.
In stunning fashion, consider that USSS Director controlled for the severe scrutiny of leaving the roof unsecured by stating that the AGR building and rooftop was outside of the USSS 3-layer perimeter.
There has never been a greater lie told one way or the other when slicing up that pie.
Consider how if they weren’t lying and covering-up, then they wouldn’t be refusing to cooperate and testify.
Consider this remarkable footage related to several positions.
Consider the introduction of the men in grey suits like the assassination version of the legendary Men in Black for extraterrestrial cover-up operations.
Consider the introduction of a man on a motorcycle accessing a building now placed outside of the security perimeter by the USSS Director.
Consider that now it’s CROOKS + 3.
Consider that the USSSS repeatedly lied about denying Trump’s Executive detail requested personnel and assets.
Consider that now there’s controversy of Biden’s resignation signature giving rise to questions about who is actually running the country [it’s been Obama this entire time].
Consider how the post-assassination Biden exit that resulted in a whiplash installation of one of the worst and most “un-electable” nominees in US history, if Harris makes it past the August DNC.
Consider the implications of Harris bringing Clinton on board as VPOTUS because this may be the best bet according to new developments and beyond the original projections on Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton and Gavin Newsom.
Consider that I wrote TO KILL A KING eleven days before they tried to kill the king.
Consider everything laid-out in the five reports before this one.
GO DEEPER
With Crooks’ mobile data:
FINAL REMARKS
Please stay tuned for Follow-up Analysis/6.
Let’s end on a humorous note:
-End-
Leave a Reply