Evidence President BIDEN Ordered The Assassination of Candidate Donald TRUMP on July 13th 2024.

a reply to: WeMustCare

How was that photo taken? From a satellite?

It was taken by Greg Nicols, the sniper in the 2 story section of the ARG building that went AWOL at the time of the shooting, to reappear 2 minutes after the shooting on the ground floor of building 6.

a reply to: WeMustCare
It may not have been biden exactly but it was definitely someone connected to him maybe one of the puppet masters. Either way there was some fishy things in the air.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Mantiss2021
a reply to: WeMustCare

Lest we forget, it was Trump who first claimed Presidential immunity, in fact, Absolute Presidential immunity for Any act committed while in office.

Biden never claimed, or sought through legislation, or the SCOTUS, that power.

I am curious, do people actually think that killing a political opponent would be an official act and not something subject to impeachment, removal, and public trial and jail? .....

Trump's attorneys argued before the Supreme Court that it would be, back in January, and the SC didn't say no. Apparently, the idea was on Trump's mind.

originally posted by: Mahogani
a reply to: WeMustCare

So where is it?

I came here for the evidence and got opinions instead. Fix your title.

Feels like when Stormy agreed to a dinner and got a single mushroom instead.

You're looking for the photos of a cake as evidence there was a cake. I'm showing crumbs from the cake at this point. The photos of the cake will be forthcoming. Either via whistleblowers, or by President Trump's Admin sharing the info with the world.

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Mantiss2021
a reply to: WeMustCare

Lest we forget, it was Trump who first claimed Presidential immunity, in fact, Absolute Presidential immunity for Any act committed while in office.

Biden never claimed, or sought through legislation, or the SCOTUS, that power.

I am curious, do people actually think that killing a political opponent would be an official act and not something subject to impeachment, removal, and public trial and jail? .....

Trump's attorneys argued before the Supreme Court that it would be, back in January, and the SC didn't say no. Apparently, the idea was on Trump's mind.

It's war. Doesn't matter that both sides are of the same nationality. God saved the MAGA leader. Reciprocation is coming at the right time. Will God save the Evil Sith leader(s)?
❓

originally posted by: Mantiss2021

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Mantiss2021
a reply to: WeMustCare

Lest we forget, it was Trump who first claimed Presidential immunity, in fact, Absolute Presidential immunity for Any act committed while in office.

Biden never claimed, or sought through legislation, or the SCOTUS, that power.

I am curious, do people actually think that killing a political opponent would be an official act and not something subject to impeachment, removal, and public trial and jail? The system didn't change, the SCOTUS just acknowledged what the interpretation was. Nobody is king or above the law. Nobody.

The SCOTUS interpretation makes it possible for a sitting President to claim that the assassination of a political rival as an official act in defense of the nation.

It would then be up to the House and Senate, in their respective roles, to impeach and remove the President from office, thus making the now ex-president subject to criminal (public) trial and imprisonment.


If one or the other legislative body decides not to prosecute an impeachment (perhaps because they are of the same party as the President, and place party over "morality"), it could happen.

Fascinating. Then the Supreme Court's decision on Immunity didn't amount to much at all, if Congress can remove the President, enabling him to be tried and convicted. That's been the case for decades, hasn't it?

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: WeMustCare
As of August 16th..

"Details Surface: USSS Counter Snipers Did Not Stop Assassin Crooks, Butler PA SWAT Did."

Expanded: theconservativetreehouse.com... y-and-quietly-released-body-for-cremation/

And Crooks was talking to a "contact person" on his cell phone, just before shooting into the Trump rally.

See photo here: gettr.com...

How was that photo taken? From a satellite?

Didn't the FBI say they couldn't access Crooks' phone?

Yeah, who took THAT picture??? !!! 😎

Crooks had a drone. Maybe he had it hovering overhead recording his actions for monitoring by his deep-state handlers.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: nugget1

don't misunderstand this post, but both of you are starting to sound like hur, slo joe is a blabbing old fool that has CRS ( can't remember sh@@) but he means well.

Because I've watched Democrat politicians commit grimes for years without ever having any consequences so I'm skeptible of this being any different?

They could have real evidence of Biden on video saying he ordered a hit on Trump and nothing would come of it.

I would love to see accountability but no matter how much proof there is it isn't likely to happen, judging on past history. The DC gang only focuses on the Republican party, or haven't you noticed?

Or, are you perhaps suggesting I don't believe Joe is cognizant of what is going on around him? That I will definitely own; the guy is about as close to being a full-on dementia poster child as you can get.

originally posted by: kwaka
a reply to: WeMustCare

How was that photo taken? From a satellite?

It was taken by Greg Nicols, the sniper in the 2 story section of the ARG building that went AWOL at the time of the shooting, to reappear 2 minutes after the shooting on the ground floor of building 6.

Thankyou for solving the origin of this mystery photo.

I still not able to get my head around the "good guys" being called "snipers". I've always believed police and military protectors on roofs with scoped rifles were "sharp shooters".

In all the movies I've seen, the "Snipers" are the bad guys.

a reply to: Euronymous2625

Yup, and a pardon won't apply to crimes against other countries.

a reply to: WeMustCare

This isn’t even remotely “evidence”. This is just conjecture.

Circumstantial evidence is a type of evidence.

a reply to: WeMustCare

I've always believed police and military protectors on roofs with scoped rifles were "sharp shooters".

A 'Counter Sniper Team' is the more official term. They do work in pairs, a spotter and a shooter.

The administration performing an assassination on an American citizen has been done before. Obama's order to kill American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki is one public case. This was done with a drone strike. For Biden to use a similar overt method against Trump will cause a lot of blowback and risks kicking off a real insurrection.

With the list of chronic failures that day and lack of candor in providing the evidence of the 'lone shooter' narrative does put the 'state sanctioned' narrative on the suspect list. In the FBI's defense at this time, it is standard practice for them to take 2-3 months for a quick investigation.

In the early days of this event, there was a call for whistleblowers to crack this case. Hopefully Ron Johnson can protect any that do come forward. In dealing with the slippery slope of national security issues and the way the system works, there is a high risk for any that do want to be candid about the situation. The Inspector General of Homeland Security is one critical position in how this plays out.

On the public level, records getting sealed for 75-100 years is common practice with these kind of issues. On a practical level, there will be some within the FBI that do have a clear picture of just what happened. The political nature of this event, the political divide in the community and the upcoming election is causing a lot of headbangers for a lot of people.

What would it do to the election if the FBI did come out 2-4 weeks before saying Biden approved the hit? With the FBI publicly saying they still had questions about Hillary just before the 2016 election helped tip that election.

a reply to: WeMustCare

So, no evidence whatsoever just opinion.

I certainly wouldn't discount the possibility but I'm afraid you'd have to provide quite a bit more substantive evidence to convince me - and others I suspect.

a reply to: Freeborn

I certainly wouldn't discount the possibility but I'm afraid you'd have to provide quite a bit more substantive evidence to convince me - and others I suspect.

Good. On something like this, more evidence is critical. At least you have a heads up on what might be down the road.

originally posted by: Mantiss2021
a reply to: WeMustCare

Lest we forget, it was Trump who first claimed Presidential immunity, in fact, Absolute Presidential immunity for Any act committed while in office.

Biden never claimed, or sought through legislation, or the SCOTUS, that power.

So then, Trump put out the hit on...HIMSELF?????

Got it!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

So then, Trump put out the hit on...HIMSELF?????

Far more plausible that someone, on his behalf if not necessarily at his instigation, hired a gunman to shoot into the crowd, while Trump clapped his hand to his ear and burst the fake blood sachet he'd concealed behind there earlier.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk

originally posted by: Mantiss2021
a reply to: WeMustCare

Lest we forget, it was Trump who first claimed Presidential immunity, in fact, Absolute Presidential immunity for Any act committed while in office.

Biden never claimed, or sought through legislation, or the SCOTUS, that power.

So then, Trump put out the hit on...HIMSELF?????

Got it!

Why should anyone assume that what played out was intended as a "hit" (assassination).


Why would anyone hinge the success of the assassination of a very public figure, with huge repercussions, many of them international, on a 20 year old kid using the "wrong" type of gun to get the job done?

Especially since they would have had the resources of multiple government agencies with decades of experience in "wet operations" including assassination.


If that is how "they" planned this fiasco, it's almost as if they expected him to miss!


Of course, IF that was the plan, all along, it makes sense that neither Biden, nor anyone in his administration would have ordered the operation.

Because, too many people would be raising the same questions that are being forwarded in this thread by supporters of the former President.


I mean, it's almost the perfect "frame up job", implicating any, and everyone, opposed to Trump.


Now who would have dreamed up a plot like that?

a reply to: WeMustCare

Not just Joe O'biden, A L L democrats are behind him.
Remember, Joe Biden like a Volkswagen didn't lift himself up to the tree tops, some one else put him there.

Democrats are doing it too, don't forget who he represents.

O'biden is a figure head for the party, not independent from it.

Presidents come and go, the people who stay in power are the real threat to our Constitutional Republic.

Just replace o'buma with o'biden;

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Mantiss2021
a reply to: WeMustCare

Lest we forget, it was Trump who first claimed Presidential immunity, in fact, Absolute Presidential immunity for Any act committed while in office.

Biden never claimed, or sought through legislation, or the SCOTUS, that power.

I am curious, do people actually think that killing a political opponent would be an official act and not something subject to impeachment, removal, and public trial and jail? .....

Trump's attorneys argued before the Supreme Court that it would be, back in January, and the SC didn't say no. Apparently, the idea was on Trump's mind.

I dont recall that. Can you link please?