Assassination factors
Informing Trump's debacle via JFK's and MLK's murders and 9-11
[Note: This analysis was originally posted on 7/15/24 and has been updated numerous times as new evidence becomes available.]
After the initial shock of JFK’s murder, evidence that the official story (the Warren Commission Report) was not only inaccurate, but that it suppressed facts that disproved its findings, the weight of burden of proof detailing the conspiracy has, over the years, thoroughly discredited the cover-up by the perpetrators.
Although one could write a book revealing the details of the plot, a few salient points apropos to recent events are worth noting:
There were multiple gunmen, based on the original autopsy photos that were changed in the official report, based on footage of JFK’s head movements during the shooting, and based on various testimonies of persons associated with the event. (here, here, and here)
The gunman blamed for JFK’s assassination (Lee Harvey Oswald) was murdered, as was his murderer (Jack Ruby)—just as the would-be assassin, Crooks on 7-13-24, was taken out and the Secret Service agent that shot him seems to have disappeared. Since one could argue that Oswald did not shoot JFK and James Earl Ray did not shoot MLK, we must consider whether Crooks fired the shot that nicked Trump, and whether other shooters were involved.
With JFK’s assassination, there was collateral damage (i.e., others were shot as well—Texas Governor John Connally and two others, one of whom died). In this current case, who shot the dead and wounded? A second shooter? (Watch the video and audio analysis linked later in this analysis.) And what about the unreported woman who was wounded?
It’s also worth noting that the FBI was found guilty of participating in MLK’s assassination (here and here).
There are also certain details of the 9-11 false flag that parallel events from 7-13-24, including advance warning (here and here) and Manchurian Candidates that supposedly hijacked the planes and died. Also, like the large stock put option on United Airlines just prior to 9-11, a large put option was taken on Trump’s business stocks (and here, but denied here and countered here) the day before the assassination attempt.
Many questions remain regarding the events preceding, during, and following Trump’s rally.
The first and most obvious question is whether this was a bona fide assassination attempt or a false-flag intended to win votes and, in either case, who planned it.
Of the details mentioned above, the most glaring fact is that once the police were aware of the shooter on the rooftop (who, we’re told, climbed up there twice, first with a rangefinder and then with a rifle, right above their heads; that is, these government snipers were the same distance as the shooter from Trump, so shots from their location would have been indistinguishable from the shooter via acoustic analysis), they did nothing to stop him (a police officer even climbed up to Crooks’ perch and then left him [under threat] without doing anything). Secondly, if the police officer or Secret Service agent (given the stand-down of the normal array of Secret Service agents assigned to Trump [here, here, here, here, and here] and the purposefully weakened on-site security) was able to shoot Crooks within seconds after Crooks fired (the police officer who shot Crooks claims to have been fired for shooting the assassin! [and here]), why are they pretending they didn’t see him (the government sniper [at a second location; i.e., not the guys pictured on the roof who had an obstructed view] had him in his sights for two or three minutes prior to the assassination attempt) and why didn't the Secret Service officer in charge consider an unidentified person with a rifle as a threat?
The excuse is that that they weren’t sure if Crooks was a government agent, but this doesn’t hold water, given that they identified him as a threat prior to his climbing up onto the building (twice) and given that they immediately returned fire and put him down. Then Cheatle, the head of the Secret Service, makes the absurd claim that they didn’t put anyone on the roof because it was sloped, even though the agents on the roof behind Trump were on a steeper roof. More likely, the entire set-up at the site was to create a clear line-of-sight to Trump, unlike other stops on the campaign trail. A local police officer said he told the Secret Service to station someone on the roof days before.
If the Secret Service and the FBI are investigating the shooting, then after all this damning evidence can we trust their findings? For example, among other things, we need an accounting of the types of bullets that killed bystanders and nicked Trump. Are they all from the same weapon and same direction? Perhaps the audio from the recording, if untampered, could determine how many shots were fired, and if they were fired from the same (or nearby) location. This is a crucial point, because there are reports of a second shooter (here and here) behind the stage, and the recent (7/19/24) audio analysis makes it clear that there were multiple shooters. This after the FBI claimed that Crooks operated alone, before they even had access to his phone.
And to further muddy the waters, Biden has ordered an “independent” investigation. It’s no wonder that the governor of Florida pushing for an investigation independent of those who, it seems, were behind the assassination attempt. Suspiciously, the Department of Justice is blocking this investigation.
The Secret Service has already posted a list of their excuses (here and here). The national President of the Fraternal Order of the Police rejected the Secret Service’s attempt to blame their men.
As a follow-up, the Secret Service suggested that Trump stop holding outdoor rallies. Given the purposeful lack of protection they provided, such a suggestion is really election interference, not any inability to provide protection.
What would have been the scenario if Trump had been killed versus what is going to be the scenario now that he survived?
In the aftermath, Biden’s handlers were quick to have him sound conciliatory, hoping that his recent remarks about Trump being in the bullseye would be forgotten, along with the vitriol that the blue party has been spewing, painting Trump as another Hitler. That lasted for about one day, as Biden stood by his bullseye remark.
We are no fan of Trump, but Biden is controlled by the same small group of financiers as Trump (one can no longer run for and serve as President without submitting to the directives of the cartel), and the record of the Biden administration is as woeful as the Trump administration, with due consideration for branding.
[Coincidentally, the day before the assassination attempt, Trump’s accounts on social media were fully restored and and two days after the event the classified documents case was dismissed.]
As we have discussed in our recent blog post, “Red or blue: Choose your poison,” both parties have their unique set of progressive and regressive planks, so whomever the financiers appoint, they win, but they always have a preferred scenario. What that scenario is, in this case, is still indeterminate (though we know some of their objectives), but apparently the spread of information regarding the Deep State’s assassination attempt was spreading too quickly, which is why the cartel crashed the Microsoft portion of the internet via CrowdStrike, owned and operated by Vanguard and BlackRock, the two principal holding companies by which the Anglo-Euro-American banking cartel controls the global for-profit corporate pyramid and various public-sector subsidiaries (the US, UK, EU, etc.).
We hope that you find our blog of value. If so, please feel free to share our articles and encourage others to sign up for our mailing list. Our last published work, 7 Steps to Global Economic and Spiritual Transformation, Volume I, Access to Tools, is available here and here. Volume II, Application of Tools, is in the works. An earlier version of this sequel, published in 2019, is online in four sections, beginning here.
* * *