JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Joe Elliott on July 29, 2024, 06:07:43 AM
-
What we can learn from the Trump case is that, just as in the JFK case, diagrams cannot ways be trusted.
There are various diagrams of the path the bullet took past Trump's head. I found one below at the 0:33 mark of a youtube video.
The diagram of the path that the bullet took, which I assume everyone has seen, clearly shows that Trump's survival was amazing. The head was turned perfectly, so the sides of the head was lined up perfectly with the path of the bullet. And the bullet was aimed perfectly, to just barely miss the head over the course of a six inch path, that would have missed him completely had the ear not stuck out a bit. This precise turn of the head made it possible for the bullet to strike the ear while missing the skull. A truly flukey shot.
I would like to point out one thing. Was this diagram the result of a very careful study by Dale Myers, using multiple photographs showing the precise location of Donald Trump's head? No. Well, what is this this diagram based on?
Two assumptions:
1. Donald Trump was struck by a bullet.
2. And, well, not really an assumption, that no other part of Trump's head was struck.
To meet these two assumptions, one would have to start off with assuming the head just happened to be turned perfectly to allow this to be possible. It has to be if he was struck by a bullet. And this is what produce the diagram.
This is a big coincidence. I am always suspicious of coincidences.
Let's consider a different scenario. The rifle bullet struck an object. It produced a spray of fragments that continued downrange which slightly wounded five men. Trump and the four officers standing near him.
Trump's head was not turn just so. The right side of his head was exposed. A fragment struck his ear. And would have continued on to strike his skull, likely killing him, had it been a rifle bullet. But being a fragment, it just gave a minor wound to the ear and was deflected away from the head. Resulting in Trump having a minor wound, just like the four other officers.
So, where is the evidence that Trump's head just happened to turned in such a way, that it was possible for a bullet to hit the ear but miss the skull? Where is the careful study that shows this is so? Anything beyond "Well, it looks to me that this might have been the case?"
Where is the study that carefully:
* studies the photographs of the position of Trump's head, and the compass heading of a midline line from front to the back of the head, through the center of the head.
and compare that to:
* the compass direction of the bullet from the sniper's position to Trump
and see how parallel these two lines are?
And not just get the compass direction of the bullet path from the sniper's position, and just assume the head was turned to face the opposite direction to make such a shot possible.
Keep in mind that most bullets that strike an ear, continue on to strike the skull and produce a fatal shot. A bullet that does strike an ear but does not strike the skull is very rare, very flucky, and should not be our starting theory. In contrast, a fragment could strike an ear and not continue on to go through the skull. A fragment is much more easily deflected.
I finally offer one piece of advice. Stop looking into a scenario of what explains Trump's wound. And start looking into a scenario that explains all the minor wounds to the five men. Make that your starting point. This would be a more productive method. And try to avoid coming up with a scenario that requires a big coincidence, like Trump's head turned perfectly parallel to the bullet path, if you can.
-
What we can learn from the Trump case is that, just as in the JFK case, diagrams cannot ways be trusted.
There are various diagrams of the path the bullet took past Trump's head. I found one below at the 0:33 mark of a youtube video.
The diagram of the path that the bullet took, which I assume everyone has seen, clearly shows that Trump's survival was amazing. The head was turned perfectly, so the sides of the head was lined up perfectly with the path of the bullet. And the bullet was aimed perfectly, to just barely miss the head over the course of a six inch path, that would have missed him completely had the ear not stuck out a bit. This precise turn of the head made it possible for the bullet to strike the ear while missing the skull. A truly flukey shot.
I would like to point out one thing. Was this diagram the result of a very careful study by Dale Myers, using multiple photographs showing the precise location of Donald Trump's head? No. Well, what is this this diagram based on?
Two assumptions:
1. Donald Trump was struck by a bullet.
2. And, well, not really an assumption, that no other part of Trump's head was struck.
To meet these two assumptions, one would have to start off with assuming the head just happened to be turned perfectly to allow this to be possible. It has to be if he was struck by a bullet. And this is what produce the diagram.
This is a big coincidence. I am always suspicious of coincidences.
Let's consider a different scenario. The rifle bullet struck an object. It produced a spray of fragments that continued downrange which slightly wounded five men. Trump and the four officers standing near him.
Trump's head was not turn just so. The right side of his head was exposed. A fragment struck his ear. And would have continued on to strike his skull, likely killing him, had it been a rifle bullet. But being a fragment, it just gave a minor wound to the ear and was deflected away from the head. Resulting in Trump having a minor wound, just like the four other officers.
So, where is the evidence that Trump's head just happened to turned in such a way, that it was possible for a bullet to hit the ear but miss the skull? Where is the careful study that shows this is so? Anything beyond "Well, it looks to me that this might have been the case?"
Where is the study that carefully:
* studies the photographs of the position of Trump's head, and the compass heading of a midline line from front to the back of the head, through the center of the head.
and compare that to:
* the compass direction of the bullet from the sniper's position to Trump
and see how parallel these two lines are?
And not just get the compass direction of the bullet path from the sniper's position, and just assume the head was turned to face the opposite direction to make such a shot possible.
Keep in mind that most bullets that strike an ear, continue on to strike the skull and produce a fatal shot. A bullet that does strike an ear but does not strike the skull is very rare, very flucky, and should not be our starting theory. In contrast, a fragment could strike an ear and not continue on to go through the skull. A fragment is much more easily deflected.
I finally offer one piece of advice. Stop looking into a scenario of what explains Trump's wound. And start looking into a scenario that explains all the minor wounds to the five men. Make that your starting point. This would be a more productive method. And try to avoid coming up with a scenario that requires a big coincidence, like Trump's head turned perfectly parallel to the bullet path, if you can.
The answer is quite simple: Another “magic bullet” like the one in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63. ;)
Seriously folks, this just shows that no matter how conclusive the evidence is, people will believe what they want to believe…
-
I'm not exactly sure what you are implying. Several shots were fired. Trump was struck on the ear. A miracle that he wasn't killed. If CTers were to apply the same standards to this situation that they apply to JFK's assassination, they would be blaming Biden and others for the attempt. One kid outsmarted Biden's entire secret service with its $3+ billion budget. He even flew a drone over the sight just hours before the event and no one apparently intervened or found that suspicious. Drones are themselves dangerous and have been used in assassination attempts. An astounding security lapse. I'm not suggesting a conspiracy but more evidence of widespread incompetence under the current administration.
-
The answer is quite simple: Another “magic bullet” like the one in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63. ;)
Seriously folks, this just shows that no matter how conclusive the evidence is, people will believe what they want to believe…
e
Conclusive evidence? What is the conclusive evidence you are talking about, that Trump was struck by a rifle bullet?
Was it the statement by the FBI director last Thursday that he did not know if Trump was struck by a bullet or if it was a fragment?
Was it the statement issued by the FBI the next day that Trump was struck by either a bullet or a fragment?
Was there a definitive study that showed that Trump was directly facing the shooter, making a shot that strikes can strike the ear but not the skull? You do have conclusive evidence that they just have not assumed that Trump directly facing the shooter at the time, not off by 10 degrees to one side or the other, making the shot impossible?
The allegedly high "shutter speed" photograph, which was strangely slightly blurred showing the bullet path? And if the very high alleged "shutter speed" is accepted indicates a speed of 8,000 feet per second bullet?
Where is this "conclusive" evidence?
You have not even presented a scenario that explains why 5 men standing close together all received minor wounds?
-
AP:
Nearly two weeks after Donald Trump’s near assassination, the FBI confirmed Friday that it was indeed a bullet that struck the former president’s ear, moving to clear up conflicting accounts about what caused the former president’s injuries after a gunman opened fire at a Pennsylvania rally.
-
Let's consider a different scenario. The rifle bullet struck an object. It produced a spray of fragments that continued downrange which slightly wounded five men. Trump and the four officers standing near him.
Trump's head was not turn just so. The right side of his head was exposed. A fragment struck his ear. And would have continued on to strike his skull, likely killing him, had it been a rifle bullet. But being a fragment, it just gave a minor wound to the ear and was deflected away from the head. Resulting in Trump having a minor wound, just like the four other officers.
So, where is the evidence that Trump's head just happened to turned in such a way, that it was possible for a bullet to hit the ear but miss the skull? Where is the careful study that shows this is so? Anything beyond "Well, it looks to me that this might have been the case?"
Where is the study that carefully:
* studies the photographs of the position of Trump's head, and the compass heading of a midline line from front to the back of the head, through the center of the head.
and compare that to:
* the compass direction of the bullet from the sniper's position to Trump
and see how parallel these two lines are?
And not just get the compass direction of the bullet path from the sniper's position, and just assume the head was turned to face the opposite direction to make such a shot possible.
Keep in mind that most bullets that strike an ear, continue on to strike the skull and produce a fatal shot. A bullet that does strike an ear but does not strike the skull is very rare, very flucky, and should not be our starting theory. In contrast, a fragment could strike an ear and not continue on to go through the skull. A fragment is much more easily deflected.
I finally offer one piece of advice. Stop looking into a scenario of what explains Trump's wound. And start looking into a scenario that explains all the minor wounds to the five men. Make that your starting point. This would be a more productive method. And try to avoid coming up with a scenario that requires a big coincidence, like Trump's head turned perfectly parallel to the bullet path, if you can.
Joe: Give us/suggest an object that caused this shrapnel/fragmentation to take place.
What is there that was between the shooter and Trump to cause this to happen? To deflect it? Other than the teleprompter I don't see anything. And the evidence is that the teleprompters were undamaged, not hit. And if shrapnel/framents from it caused the injuries to five other people wouldn't it have been essentially blown apart? That's a lot of shards.
So what do we have? If we subtract the bullets by themselves and the teleprompter (on the left below) as the cause then what is there?
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID11506235412/Keys1fl1f4vboov/teleprompters.JPG)
-
Joe: Give us/suggest an object that caused this shrapnel/fragmentation to take place.
What is there that was between the shooter and Trump to cause this to happen? To deflect it? Other than the teleprompter I don't see anything. And the evidence is that the teleprompters were undamaged, not hit. And if shrapnel/framents from it caused the injuries to five other people wouldn't it have been essentially blown apart? That's a lot of shards.
So what do we have? If we subtract the bullets by themselves and the teleprompter (on the left below) as the cause then what is there?
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID11506235412/Keys1fl1f4vboov/teleprompters.JPG)
I don't know the setup at the stage. But there were five men who all suffered minor wounds.
You imply there is no possible object the bullet could have struck. Where are the photographs that show this? No object within 100 feet of Trump? Bullet fragments flew over 100 yards at Dealey Plaza. Unless one argues that the, again, slight wound to James Tague was caused by a rifle bullet, not a fragment. Nothing in the crowd that could have been struck?
Question: Were all five slightly wounded by rifle bullets?
If not, then some of them, perhaps all of them were wounded by fragments, fragments of the bullet or fragments of the object struck.
If any of them were wounded by a fragment than there must of been an object that was struck by a bullet, because bullets don't just fragment in the air without striking something first. That you don't know or I don't know of such an object does not matter. We can deduce the present of such an object. Otherwise there no reasonable way to explain why five men in the same area should all suffer minor wounds.
Question: If even one of the five was wounded by a fragment, how did that fragment get created.
Question: Who got control of the teleprompter and the other equipment in the area? Did the police seize control of it and carefully examine it and could find no damage? Or did the Trump team wisk it away?
How do we know no object was struck by a bullet just uprange from Trump?
-
(https://images2.imgbox.com/f9/cd/gN38ksr2_o.gif)
Here's a preliminary animation based on when I believe the first shot arrived (00:00) and ending when I believe the second shot arrived (00:90). The third bullet arrives, by my guesstimate at 01:65 (that moment in the animation is excluded). Thus .90 sec between shots 1 and 2; .75 between shots 2 and 3. As sound lags behind the arrival of the bullets, I have made the arrival of the bullets .15 sec before the sounds were recorded. That lag may have to adjusted.
I do see an unusual rolling of the right shoulder and forward-slouching of the head prior to the right hand being raised. I have the right hand raising up at the very moment the second bullet arrived.
Well done! Thanks! Notice the lady at the very top center. Just above the sign. She turns her head to look in the direction the shots came from. A reaction to the sound I would think.
-
Good observation.
If Trump is just raising his right hand as the second bullet arrives (00:90), then it's not going to coincide with the bullet streak picture. The right hand is not at chest level for another 00.15 sec. Did the NYT impose sound lag onto their animation; that would help explain it. Back to the drawing board.
I think that there are a few variables that would need to be considered to be able to synchronize the sound exactly. But Mills’ bullet streak photo is a very exact reference point to start from. The distances involved from the muzzle to Trump and to the microphone location. Analyze the sound signature to try to separate the muzzle blast from the sonic boom of the bullet itself. Trump’s hand appears to be at about the level of his mouth when the bullet streak is seen in the photo. The sound of the muzzle blast would be slightly delayed due to the distance. But the sonic boom should be closer to the time of the bullet streak photo.
-
Let's consider a different scenario. The rifle bullet struck an object. It produced a spray of fragments that continued downrange which slightly wounded five men. Trump and the four officers standing near him.
Trump's head was not turn just so. The right side of his head was exposed. A fragment struck his ear. And would have continued on to strike his skull, likely killing him, had it been a rifle bullet. But being a fragment, it just gave a minor wound to the ear and was deflected away from the head. Resulting in Trump having a minor wound, just like the four other officers.
I haven't seen anything about "four other officers" being hit by fragments. Where does this come from?
-
I haven't seen anything about "four other officers" being hit by fragments. Where does this come from?
It's in the story below: "Investigates has learned that four Pittsburgh police officers assigned to the former president’s motorcade yesterday suffered minor injuries during the shooting.
The four motorcycle officers were part of Donald Trump’s escort to and from the rally in Butler.
Sources tell Chief Investigator Rick Earle the officers were just feet away from Trump when shots rang out. The four officers suffered minor injuries from flying debris caused by the bullets. Sources say the officers were hit with either plastic or metal fragments when the bullets struck objects nearby."
And Trump's doctor, Ronny Jackson, said his nephew, who was in the crowd, was grazed in the neck by an unknown object.
Link: https://www.yahoo.com/news/live-updates-apparent-shots-fired-223759785.html
-
(https://images2.imgbox.com/03/e0/cKZcGf8i_o.png)
The sonic booms arriving at the same moment as the bullets (yellow arrows)? A smaller set of three spikes identical in separation (white arrows) follow the three larger spikes. The smaller spikes are probably the report of each muzzle blast, just not recorded as loud as the sonic booms?
So virtually no time lag necessary if we use where the Times placed the bullets in their animation? The sonic boom set-of-spikes coincides with the arrival of each bullet?
Mi no comprende. What say you?
If the recording microphone is on the podium right in front of Trump, then this makes sense to me. The small distance from the bullets to the microphone would make any time delay be so small that it would be virtually negligible. And it makes sense to me that the microphone location would be on the podium.
-
I haven't seen anything about "four other officers" being hit by fragments. Where does this come from?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/live-updates-apparent-shots-fired-223759785.html
11 Investigates has learned that four Pittsburgh police officers assigned to the former president’s motorcade yesterday suffered minor injuries during the shooting.
The four motorcycle officers were part of Donald Trump’s escort to and from the rally in Butler.
Sources tell Chief Investigator Rick Earle the officers were just feet away from Trump when shots rang out. The four officers suffered minor injuries from flying debris caused by the bullets.
Sources say the officers were hit with either plastic or metal fragments when the bullets struck objects nearby.
They were treated at the scene. They were okay to escort Trump back to the airport in Pittsburgh last night after he was treated at Butler Memorial Hospital.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/one-other-detail
A report from local TV station WPXI at 4:50 PM Sunday said this (emphasis added) …
11 Investigates has learned that four Pittsburgh police officers assigned to the former president’s motorcade yesterday suffered minor injuries during the shooting.
The four motorcycle officers were part of Donald Trump’s escort to and from the rally in Butler.
Sources tell Chief Investigator Rick Earle the officers were just feet away from Trump when shots rang out. The four officers suffered minor injuries from flying debris caused by the bullets.
Sources say the officers were hit with either plastic or metal fragments when the bullets struck objects nearby.
-
Let me list two groups of gunshot victims:
Group A:
President Kennedy
Governor Connally
Tromas Crooks
Corey Comperatore
Butler PA 57 year old anonymous man, initially in critical condition, now released
Butler PA 74 year old anonymous man, initially in critical condition, now released
Group B:
James Tague
Donald Trump
4 police officers standing near Trump
What does the Group A people have in common? All were seriously wounded or killed. What does the Group B people have in common? All suffered only minor injuries.
What else do the people in Group A people have in common? They were hit by a one or two rifle bullets. What else do the people in Group B have in common? They were hit by fragments.
If a person is seriously injured or killed, it should not be assumed that they were hit by a fragment. Unless the evidence is overwhelming. Otherwise, the default belief should be that they were struck by a bullet.
If a person has minor gunshot injuries, it should not be assumed that they were hit by a bullet. Unless the evidence is overwhelming. Otherwise, the default belief should be that they were struck by a fragment.
Now, why is it we should assume that Trump was w by a bullet. But the four officers standing near him were hit by fragments?
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/live-updates-apparent-shots-fired-223759785.html
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/one-other-detail
That's it? A single early report. I've seen nothing to confirm that four officers were injured by fragments.
-
That's it? A single early report. I've seen nothing to confirm that four officers were injured by fragments.
And I have seen nothing to confirm that the four officers were not slightly injured by fragments.
Clearly, the media is biased in some way. Either they are biased against Trump, and so they do not follow up on this report because they know it would show that no one else was slightly injured, only Trump, strengthening the case that Trump may have been hit by a bullet. Or, they are biased for Trump, and so they ignore these early reports because they known any digging will confirm the minor wounds of the four officers, strengthening the case that they all were slightly wounded by fragments. In any case, the media is falling down on the job by not digging into this to report that this early report was false or confirmed.
Why would the media be biased in favor of Trump? Because they want a horse race. They anticipate that Trump will falter in the polls. Meaning they have to help Trump as much as they can now. Like by concentrating on Biden's age issues while ignoring Trump's.
I don't know what the truth is, but a lot points to Trump being wounded by a fragment.
* Trump was slightly wounded, which is more typical of wounds from fragments, not by rifle bullets.
* Reports of four others standing near Trump being slightly wounded as well.
* Trump not allowing the release of the medical reports on the treatment of his ear that evening. That is super suspicious. The strongest argument against the wound being caused by a bullet. If it was caused by a bullet, Trump would do whatever it took to show this to the public.
* Easier to capture an image of a slower moving fragment than a fast moving bullet, because the timing has to be so much more precise for a fast moving bullet.
* The unlikely location of a grazing wound.
Not all grazing wounds are equally probable. It is possible that one could be grazed along three inches of the inner upper arm, and three inches of the torso, caused by a bullet that passes just under the armpit. Possible, but it would require the person's torso to be pointed in a certain direction, with the arm slightly away from the body held just right. A grazing wound along the top of the shoulder or outer side of the arm is more probable.
Similarly a grazing wound of the ear, without also striking the skull, requires the head to be pointed in a certain direction, or it just can't work. But a fragment can do that because it is much more easily deflected than a bullet.
In any case, I don't think this is a slam dunk that this wound was caused by a rifle bullet.
-
And I have seen nothing to confirm that the four officers were not slightly injured by fragments.
Clearly, the media is biased in some way. Either they are biased against Trump, and so they do not follow up on this report because they know it would show that no one else was slightly injured, only Trump, strengthening the case that Trump may have been hit by a bullet. Or, they are biased for Trump, and so they ignore these early reports because they known any digging will confirm the minor wounds of the four officers, strengthening the case that they all were slightly wounded by fragments. In any case, the media is falling down on the job by not digging into this to report that this early report was false or confirmed.
Why would the media be biased in favor of Trump? Because they want a horse race. They anticipate that Trump will falter in the polls. Meaning they have to help Trump as much as they can now. Like by concentrating on Biden's age issues while ignoring Trump's.
I don't know what the truth is, but a lot points to Trump being wounded by a fragment.
* Trump was slightly wounded, which is more typical of wounds from fragments, not by rifle bullets.
* Reports of four others standing near Trump being slightly wounded as well.
* Trump not allowing the release of the medical reports on the treatment of his ear that evening. That is super suspicious. The strongest argument against the wound being caused by a bullet. If it was caused by a bullet, Trump would do whatever it took to show this to the public.
* Easier to capture an image of a slower moving fragment than a fast moving bullet, because the timing has to be so much more precise for a fast moving bullet.
* The unlikely location of a grazing wound.
Not all grazing wounds are equally probable. It is possible that one could be grazed along three inches of the inner upper arm, and three inches of the torso, caused by a bullet that passes just under the armpit. Possible, but it would require the person's torso to be pointed in a certain direction, with the arm slightly away from the body held just right. A grazing wound along the top of the shoulder or outer side of the arm is more probable.
Similarly a grazing wound of the ear, without also striking the skull, requires the head to be pointed in a certain direction, or it just can't work. But a fragment can do that because it is much more easily deflected than a bullet.
In any case, I don't think this is a slam dunk that this wound was caused by a rifle bullet.
I've seen nothing in any other subsequent report to suggest that four officers were struck by fragments. And there didn't appear to be any police officers near Trump. Only secret service agents. That doesn't appear to have happened.
Why would the media cover up injuries to police officers? If you believe the media is biased in favor of Trump, you haven't been paying attention the last eight years. The FBI has investigated and confirmed Trump was struck by a bullet. There was nothing between Trump and the shooter to fragment. The bullet appears to have grazed Trump. Why is it unlikely that his ear would be grazed if the shooter was aiming for his head and he turned his head? You have a lot of false and baseless premises here with a media conspiracy theory.
The PA police indicated that three people were shot in addition to Trump. There is no mention of any injuries to police officers.
Butler, PA – The Pennsylvania State Police today released the names of the three attendees shot during the attempted assassination of former President Trump at yesterday’s rally in Butler County.
The deceased victim was identified as Corey Comperatore, 50, of Sarver, PA. The second victim has been identified as 57-year-old David Dutch, of New Kensington, PA, who is currently listed in stable condition. The third victim was identified as 74-year-old James Copenhaver, of Moon Township, PA. He is also listed in stable condition.
-
What’s really amazing is the incredible ABSENCE of surveillance cameras.
What’s really amazing is the incredible ABSENCE of anyone actually IN the HQ room looking out the window that allowed an easy view of the ENTIRE side of roof that Crooks crawled up to, then RAN across, then took a prone position and slowly wormed his way up to the ridge line.
What’s really amazing is a police officer actually SEEING and CONFRONTING Crooks with the rifle in his hand and pointing it at the officer, and somehow this information does not get relayed IMMEDIATELY to the counter sniper team, The SS agents, and to Trump especially , nor does the officer attempt to reengage and climb on the roof again to attempt to get a shot at Crooks.
-
I've seen nothing in any other subsequent report to suggest that four officers were struck by fragments. And there didn't appear to be any police officers near Trump. Only secret service agents. That doesn't appear to have happened.
Why would the media cover up injuries to police officers? If you believe the media is biased in favor of Trump, you haven't been paying attention the last eight years. The FBI has investigated and confirmed Trump was struck by a bullet. There was nothing between Trump and the shooter to fragment. The bullet appears to have grazed Trump. Why is it unlikely that his ear would be grazed if the shooter was aiming for his head and he turned his head? You have a lot of false and baseless premises here with a media conspiracy theory.
The PA police indicated that three people were shot in addition to Trump. There is no mention of any injuries to police officers.
Butler, PA – The Pennsylvania State Police today released the names of the three attendees shot during the attempted assassination of former President Trump at yesterday’s rally in Butler County.
The deceased victim was identified as Corey Comperatore, 50, of Sarver, PA. The second victim has been identified as 57-year-old David Dutch, of New Kensington, PA, who is currently listed in stable condition. The third victim was identified as 74-year-old James Copenhaver, of Moon Township, PA. He is also listed in stable condition.
Well, here is a later story.
https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/pittsburgh-motorcycle-supervisors-removed-trump-rally/
2 Pittsburgh motorcycle officers removed from unit after Trump rally
By Mamie Bah
July 18, 2024 / 5:55 PM EDT / CBS Pittsburgh
PITTSBURGH (KDKA) -- The Pittsburgh Fraternal Order of Police is fiercely defending two of its own after the motorcycle supervisors who were part of former President Donald Trump's motorcade in Butler County on SaPersonay were removed from the unit.
"There's a dispute whether they had authorization to be there or if they decided on their own they were going to go," said Beth Pittinger, the executive director of the Pittsburgh Citizen Police Review Board. "We don't know how they got there."
The motorcycle supervisors have been transferred out of the cycle unit as that's being investigated.
Ten motorcycle officers were part of the former president's motorcade SaPersonay, the day would-be assassin Thomas Crooks fired from a building outside the security perimeter, killing Corey Comperatore, wounding the former president, others in the crowd and law enforcement. Four of them, including the two who have been transferred, were injured.
Robert Swartzwelder, the president of the Pittsburgh Fraternal Order of Police said in a statement: "In a time when we should be honoring the heroics of these officers, we've created some petty administrative investigation in the midst of a serious political race."
"They may have had permission to be there that we don't know," Pittinger told KDKA-TV's Mamie Bah. "That has to be established and the public has the right to know that when we are faced with a severe shortage of officers."
In response, the FOP has filed two grievances on behalf of the supervisors. One has been on the force for more than 30 years, the other nearly 20.
A spokesperson for Pittsburgh police said, "The transfers were unrelated to the rally. That was an administrative decision."
© 2024 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.
So, here is a follow up report from five days after the July 13 shooting.
There were ten motorcycle police officers who were part of the protection of Trump. This article reiterates that four of the officer's were injured. The latest developement is that curiously, there is some dispute whether all ten officers had the proper authorization to be there. Two of the four injured officers might not have had proper authorization and have been transferred to a different unit. Some of the other officers are upset about this because they believe proper procedures where followed. So, five days later, we are getting more details about these four injured officers. Two of them may or may not have had proper authorization to be there.
This does not sound like a story about imaginary officers. This story continues the previous story about four officers injured by debris. Except here they just refer to them a the four injured officers. And now two of the four may be in minor trouble.
I keep finding more and more stories about the four injured police officers, while you find no story about this original story being a mistake. How about this time, you find a story about the original story being a mistake and stop claiming this never happened without any evidence to back up your claim. Find something that says four police officers were never injured. Or were injured but by something other than flying debris.
As far as "no police officers near Trump" I saw a youtube video (see below) that shows, what appears to me to be a uniformed police officer walking pass the podium, in front of Trump, and out of view. So it does appear there were some police officers very close to Trump, and not just Secret Service Agents (as I had heard myself).
He appears right around the 1:00 mark. He is dressed in a black short sleeve shirt, with a vertical belt of some sort, walking behind the podium, so he was right in front of Trump, near his feet, a minute or two before the shots were fired.
-
What’s really amazing is the incredible ABSENCE of surveillance cameras.
What’s really amazing is the incredible ABSENCE of anyone actually IN the HQ room looking out the window that allowed an easy view of the ENTIRE side of roof that Crooks crawled up to, then RAN across, then took a prone position and slowly wormed his way up to the ridge line.
What’s really amazing is a police officer actually SEEING and CONFRONTING Crooks with the rifle in his hand and pointing it at the officer, and somehow this information does not get relayed IMMEDIATELY to the counter sniper team, The SS agents, and to Trump especially , nor does the officer attempt to reengage and climb on the roof again to attempt to get a shot at Crooks.
The officer dropped to the ground and injured his ankles. I don't think he was going to reengage anyone anytime soon, particularly by climbing up onto a roof.
There were just seconds from the time the officer hit the ground. I am certain he could not talk to all over the radio, just a few, so it would take more than a few seconds to get the word out. If everyone could talk to everyone, the radio would be jammed with crosstalk.
-
The officer dropped to the ground and injured his ankles. I don't think he was going to reengage anyone anytime soon, particularly by climbing up onto a roof.
There were just seconds from the time the officer hit the ground. I am certain he could not talk to all over the radio, just a few, so it would take more than a few seconds to get the word out. If everyone could talk to everyone, the radio would be jammed with crosstalk.
I haven’t followed this event very closely so I wasn’t sure that the account I had seen of this officer was true. It is easy to second-guess people after the fact. But it does seem to me that (if he had a radio) the officer should have alerted others that he was suspicious and was climbing onto the roof to investigate. And, after he had dropped to the ground, it seems to me that he might could have at least fired his weapon into the ground three times as a SOS and warning. If the officer had at least done that, the sound of his warning gunshots might have alerted Trump and his security team that something was wrong and that they should take cover immediately.