I am reposting a post I made on a different but similar thread that addresses the correct point made by Jerry Organ that their were are other other objects a bullet could have struck, and so fragments were a possibility. There were fragments found near the stage and so there was at least one object a bullet could have struck and
did strike which resulted in the fragments being found near the stage. We should stop debating this. An object was struck and produced fragments.
* * * * *
Below is a link to a New York Times article from almost two weeks after the assassination attempt, that has flown under the radar.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/25/us/politics/fbi-bullet-trump-rally.htmlF.B.I. Examining Bullet Fragments Found at Trump Rally Site
The bureau is assessing what caused the former president’s wound during an assassination attempt. The question has turned political.
July 25, 2024
The F.B.I. is examining numerous metal fragments found near the stage at a campaign rally in Butler, Pa., to determine whether an assassin’s bullet — or potential debris — grazed former President Donald J. Trump’s head, bloodying his ear, according to the F.B.I. and a federal law enforcement official.
The bureau has asked to interview Mr. Trump as part of its broader investigation, hoping to provide insights into the shooting and possibly a more complete record of his injury, the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the continuing inquiry.
Unanswered questions about the object that struck the Republican nominee for president have lingered since the shooting on July 13, with Mr. Trump claiming that he was struck by a bullet — and casting his survival as an act of divine intervention.
F.B.I. officials have been more circumspect, citing the need to analyze the evidence before determining what struck Mr. Trump — a bullet, metal shard or something else.
The bureau’s shooting reconstruction team “continues to examine evidence from the scene, including bullet fragments, and the investigation remains ongoing,” the F.B.I. said in a statement on Thursday. In addition to injuring Mr. Trump, the gunman, Thomas Crooks, 20, of Bethel Park, Pa., shot three rally attendees, one fatally.
Steven Cheung, a Trump campaign spokesman, did not answer whether the bureau had asked to review the former president’s medical records after the incident, but Mr. Trump has not released them publicly.
F.B.I. officials view the identification of the projectile as important, but not a central focus of a sprawling criminal investigation into the actions of the gunman. They are deeply interested in Mr. Crooks’s rationale or any indication that he might have had an accomplice or other help. So far, they have not found a motive nor a conspirator.
“The bureau’s priority is finding whether anybody helped the shooter and eliminating any ongoing threat,” said Michael Harrigan, a former F.B.I. special agent who ran the bureau firearms training unit in Quantico, Va.
“From an investigative standpoint, knowing what happened to the president’s ear doesn’t really matter,” he added.
It matters a great deal from a political standpoint.
“With respect to former President Trump, there’s some question about whether or not it’s a bullet or shrapnel that hit his ear,” Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, told Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio and the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, on Wednesday.
That statement prompted a fierce backlash and continued Republican attacks on Mr. Wray.
“It’s shocking Christopher Wray doesn’t know what the facts are, but that probably says more about his job performance — or lack thereof — than anything else,” Mr. Cheung said.
Speaker Mike Johnson told NBC on Thursday: “We’ve all seen the video, we’ve seen the analysis, we’ve heard it from multiple sources in different angles that a bullet went through his ear.”
“There’s a lot of frustration and concern about the leadership with these agencies,” Mr. Johnson added.
In a social media post Thursday night, Mr. Trump lashed out at Mr. Wray, saying: “No wonder the once storied F.B.I. has lost the confidence of America!”
Mr. Trump said there was no glass and no shrapnel. “No, it was, unfortunately, a bullet that hit my ear, and hit it hard.”
The F.B.I. said in a statement that the bureau “has been consistent and clear that the shooting was an attempted assassination of former President Trump, which resulted in his injury, as well as the death of a heroic father and the injuries of several other victims.”
It is not unusual for the type of bullet that Mr. Crooks fired from his AR-15-style semiautomatic rifle to tumble end over end and break apart after hitting even a small solid object. Gun experts say a fragment might, for instance, have hit a metal stanchion.
Still, a bullet could have grazed Mr. Trump’s ear, and the F.B.I. has not ruled that out. Investigators found eight rifle casings on the roof where the shooter was positioned.
It is not clear if investigators have eliminated other potential sources of debris. But bureau analysts appear to be focused on metal fragments, as opposed to glass from the teleprompters onstage. Photos of the teleprompters next to Mr. Trump show they were intact after the bullets were fired.
F.B.I. analysts are also examining still images and other electronic evidence for clues.
Gun experts said the F.B.I. could rely on trajectory analysis, a physical examination of any linked bullet and the president’s wound to possibly figure out what happened. A detailed analysis of bullet trajectories, footage, photos and audio by The New York Times strongly suggests Mr. Trump was grazed by the first of eight bullets fired by Mr. Crooks.
The bureau could also get lucky and find the former president’s DNA on a piece of a bullet. But even that would likely not establish if a fragment or the actual bullet hit his ear.
One other scenario investigators are likely to explore: that the bullet, deadly but friable, might have fragmented after skimming Mr. Trump’s ear.
“The problem you have with a bullet traveling at 3,200 feet per second is that it fragments very easily when it hits a surface before the target,” Mr. Harrigan said. “It’s going to be tough with the fragmentation to definitely say what happened. ”
Again, here is the critical sentence:
The F.B.I. is examining numerous metal fragments found near the stage at a campaign rally in Butler, Pa., to determine whether an assassin’s bullet — or potential debris — grazed former President Donald J. Trump’s head, bloodying his ear, according to the F.B.I. and a federal law enforcement official.
This lays to rest several false arguments made by those who support the notion that Trump must have been hit by a bullet, a fragment is impossible:
* "There is no object that a bullet could have struck that would produce fragments."
FALSE: The presence of these fragments near the stage proves there was at least one object a bullet could have hit, and which MUST have hit, which did would produce fragments.
* "The lack of any damage, any damage what so ever, to the Teleprompter PROVES no fragments COULD POSSIBLY be produced.
FALSE: There were other objects a bullet could have hit before reaching the stage, like the four metal hand rails. The lack of damage to the Teleprompter proves nothing.
* "No object was in the line of sight from the shooter to the target".
FALSE: Assuming the shot is lined up correctly, and a stupid firing position was not chosen, there is never an object in the line of sight for any attempted shooting. But this reasoning assumes that all shots will be perfectly aimed. The reality if that not all shots are perfectly aimed, particularly with shooters without expert training. And so, in reality, fragments are sometimes produced by a bullet, even though there was a direct line path the bullet could have taken to the target without hitting anything else.
* There were absolutely no policemen anywhere near Trump when the shot was fired. The only up close protection personal were Secret Service Agents.
FALSE: At least one of these "Imaginary" policemen is clearly visible in a video near the foot of the podium within a minute of the first shot.
* The early report of four motorcycle policemen standing near Trump being wounded is possibly a dubious early story.
FALSE: The media reported five days later that two of these four motorcycle policemen who were injured were in minor hot water because they might not have had proper authorization to travel to Butler to protect Trump. A strange subsequence story about "Imaginary" motorcycle policemen who were slightly wounded, like Trump.
Clearly the four motorcycle policemen were most likely injured by flying fragments. No one argues "No, each were slightly injured by a rifle bullet." The natural scenario, until proven otherwise, is that all five individuals who were standing near each other, Trump and the four motorcycle policemen, were slightly wounded by fragments, possibly by bullet fragments, but not by rifle bullets.
And there is a clear motive for Trump to lie about this. To sound more heroic for being hit a bullet, rather than a fragment that could have been carrying just one one thousandth of the kinetic energy of a rifle bullet.
