Routh is a patsy groomed by the CIA and trained at Fort Bragg"

a reply to: TinfoilTophat

THAT is the real question I surmise.

Why, if some have speculated here, if they want him gone, do they keep sending in the clowns?

To what end? What purpose?

a reply to: DAVID64

The problem is, what happens when they send a real shooter ?

They're setting the stage to show just how many think Trump is n 'existential threat to our democracy'.; the professional, successful shooter will be the gotaway and become one of history's greates mysteries and DB Cooper will lose first place status.

a reply to: network dude

LOL, so you didn't say "he hoaxed it", but it would just be logical that he hoaxed it. Own your words Terry, if you are going to say them, own them.

Dude, hold up a sec. Open your mind. Don't get stuck on what you see as my dislike for Trump and listen, ok? I did not say he hoaxed it. I might have sure, but I didn't. That is only how you interpret what I said, twice. I own my words but lay no claim to your interpretation.

For one thing I don't believe that he himself has the capacity to orchestrate these attempts. My suggestion was that IT MAY HAVE BEEN OTHERS that want him to win who could be behind attempts to make it appear as if there are attempts on his life.

These people might be those who support him to the end, or more likely those who want him to win to increase that power bubble who then would do, ''what ever'' to evict him from the center of that bubble and take over in his place? This has nothing to do with popular liberal or conservative politics, it only has to do with POWER, pure and simple.

originally posted by: SteamyAmerican
a reply to: TinfoilTophat

THAT is the real question I surmise.

Why, if some have speculated here, if they want him gone, do they keep sending in the clowns?

To what end? What purpose?

Which scenario is more believable in the eyes of the public? A real assassin is not going to want to get captured. I would say most of their targets aren’t protected by other government agencies. They are going to want a substantial amount of money. The risk doesn’t outweigh the reward.

A lone gunman, who already has a social media presence with established reason for wanting to shoot Trump, is an easier pill to swallow for those who will be asking the questions. Plus they probably have a list of people they can goad into doing it. They know who is mentally capable, they’ve already been watching these people. Like multiple past incidents these guys are on a watch list. For what purpose? I say to weaponize them when a need for them presents itself. How many past bombers were taught how to make explosives by the very ones who later caught them for making those explosives? They are useful idiots.

They were hopeful that the first attempt was successful. Since he wasn’t security was amped. The odds of being successful are diminishing, so you leak his whereabouts hoping the next one can make contact.
When the window of opportunity starts to fade, like it currently has, they probably will send the real deal.

If this is orchestrated by an intel agency, the two
lower level attempts could be intentional, done
as psy war op. To assert control over Trump
psychologically, stem the crowds at his rallies,
disrupt his campaign.

There will likely be future attempts, stepped
up. 100% obvious the media is taking talking
points from some intel agency in the way
they are covering the attempts.

Likely the same IC that pulled off the Russia
hoax, the impeachments, etc.

Regardless, the first shooter was not trying
to miss or make it a close call.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

For one thing I don't believe that he himself has the capacity to orchestrate these attempts. My suggestion was that IT MAY HAVE BEEN OTHERS that want him to win who could be behind attempts to make it appear as if there are attempts on his life.

Why risk actually killing him, others, when anyone with two brain cells can see through the medias b.s. that Trump is going to win in a “fair” election.

The crowd size of every event he holds should tell an educated person he already won the presidency. The unbiased pollsters have him ahead.

The current administration has created economic strife, but is running on the platform that they will fix what they broke, while not currently trying to fix anything.
They installed Kamala, she wasn’t democratically elected to be Joes replacement. People have woken up.
The race card has been spent.
The propaganda machine is broken.
You cannot keep telling people Trump will destroy America when they already have four years of his presidency to compare the current one to. People can clearly see the current administration is the one destroying the economy.

Anyone who grocery shops or wants to buy a home can see they are not fixing anything.
The only people voting for Kamala either have no children to worry about or already owns a home. The rest of the US isn’t economically sound enough to take the risk of a Harris administration…a person who has no past accomplishments other than stoking the flames of division and calling it unity.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

So you think someone had Crooks shoot him in the ear, with iron sights at 150 yards?

a reply to: TheLieWeLive

First,I find little to disagree with in your break down of our current state of affairs.

However, there is this that you have stated.

Why risk actually killing him, others, when anyone with two brain cells can see through the medias b.s. that Trump is going to win in a “fair” election.

The crowd size of every event he holds should tell an educated person he already won the presidency. The unbiased pollsters have him ahead.

One thing, it sure is nice to count ones self as having more than two brain cells and among the crowd that is educated.

Those that head to his rallies do not demonstrate to me any education at all. What they demonstrate to me is that they are victims of celebrity culture. Celebrity culture loves the same thing over and over again. Celebrities offer that. Actors playing the same type rolls movie after movie after movie. Singers and musicians offering the same kind of song album after album, show after show. People showing up concert after concert, city after city just to be in a huge crowd of like minded fans and then going home again to brag that ''they were there''.

And yes, all those who attend Trump rallies will vote for Trump. They are fans. However I see no reason to consider this a reflection of the broader scope of the voting public other than of course those who support Harris in her rallies in the same fashion.

As for the polls, ,I also pay little attention to them because of, just as you point out, their bias.Yet even then, didn't Trump come out right after his tv show with Harris and claim that he won the debate? He cited polls he did, and claimed that they were indicative of his victory. He claimed that all the polls had him winning. 60/40, 70/30. even as high as 92/6.

So here, Trump would have us believe in BIASED polls. Myself, I have no time or patience to discover ANY poll that is unbiased so I just give them no heed.

a reply to: network dude

I think Crooks acted alone though I cannot prove it. If you think you can prove it either way go ahead. If you want to believe that he did not act alone, all I am trying to point out here is that we might not want to limit ourselves to who those people might be.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

I directed my response to you but not because I believed it would convince you otherwise. I did so because I know others will read it, see the discernible difference in mindset, and then decide which one makes more sense.

For you to believe that crowd size or unbiased polling is not a determining factor on who is most popular in this election is not my concern.
Trumps popularity would be notable at any other time in history if it was anyone else. I know if I was to put Harris on the receiving end of these accomplishments you would have agreed.

Trump is not the candidate who has to bus in his supporters. They have driver’s licenses. It’s Democrats, according to their base, who aren’t intelligent enough to acquire one.

a reply to: TheLieWeLive

Past or present there is no doubting Trump's popularity. Past or present there is no doubting a propensity for gullibility in humans, especially in large groupings. Toss Harris in to that mix and you might understand my position more fully.

originally posted by: BingoMcGoof
a reply to: network dude



For one thing I don't believe that he himself has the capacity to orchestrate these attempts. My suggestion was that IT MAY HAVE BEEN OTHERS that want him to win who could be behind attempts to make it appear as if there are attempts on his life.

These people might be those who support him to the end, or more likely those who want him to win to increase that power bubble who then would do, ''what ever'' to evict him from the center of that bubble and take over in his place? This has nothing to do with popular liberal or conservative politics, it only has to do with POWER, pure and simple.

Finally! Someone who is able to consider the implications of a "bigger picture", a picture I've been suggesting since the first attempt.


Now, let's expand on that a bit.


Let's say that these "hero escapes death, Again!" set pieces achieve their goal, rally the undecided voters to Trump's side, and win his election in November.


But, there are (at least) two problems with Trump now as POTUS for those who maneuvered him into office:

1.) He is unpredictable, uncontrollable, and easily distracted. Not the kind of manager you want, or can depend on to carry out "the Plan" (whatever that might be) that was the reason for this whole effort in the first place. And these potentially troublesome qualities are only becoming more apparent, and significant, as the result of,

2.) Trump is old. And getting older. Problem with building a movement around a personality, as opposed to an ideal, is that people, eventually, fade away and/or die. And the movement dies with them. Unless.


Trump wins, gets sworn in,


And either dies in office, or, owing to his advanced age and/or mental exhaustion (illness), is swiftly removed from office in favor of Vance, who happens to have a philosophical alliance which more closely, and dependently, aligns with those same power-brokers.

Don’t point a weapon at anything you don’t intend to shoot.

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

a reply to: Dalamax

You fail to consider the they were going for a kill but a miss was just as good for that moment. Trump was extremely lucky that day and this past weekend. They are getting more desperate but were using people that while motivated, we're not the best to get the job done, but those two were more deniable to them. They were not intending to miss.

They went for a kill but used the d team because they considered a near miss just as good. That thinking also failed.

a reply to: Mantiss2021

And finally someone, you, who has been willing to glimpse the enormity of the powers that play here. Yes, indeed, I agree with you out and out. It's well beyond the power play of Republican or Democrat, it's a power play between major economic forces.

'What I see is there is old money and there is new money. jPlease excuse those two overly simplistic labels. Maybe old money and future money would be better. Old money wants to continue it's monopoly and new money wants to shift it to themselves. And it's not just about control of government but more, control of the entire economy.

As to the question of Trump. Is he an asset to the future or a liability to those economic powers that are making attempts to orchestrate our future. To the old money Democrats, certainly a liability one to be defeated in a few weeks. And to new money he is definitely an asset. An asset because he controls about fifty percent of political fandom. He is the key, at this point to winning a real election for any power groups on the right.

However, for the reasons you give above his value as an asset is quickly waning and once he is elected whatever asset he might have been will be gone. He will be a liability. If he wins, if he has any sense of survival, he will within weeks of inauguration, find a way to save face and resign in favor of Vance because even he should know what happens to liabilities in the world of finance.

I had thought about writing a short story for ATS and calling it ''The Martyrdom of Donald Trump''. He is a symbol and symbols have a life of their own. Dead or alive the symbol lives on, until as you suggest a live symbol tarnishes and loses luster. Dead, that symbol becomes enshrined. Which leads us to Vance.

The left is happy to laugh at him and count him as a boot licking loser, the Trumpian right see him as a convert, I see him as neither. I see him as a Trojan Horse.

originally posted by: TinfoilTophat
Why would they use, in BOTH attempts, ineffective gunmen using semi automatic rifles for a long range target?

Are these shadow governors just a bunch of cheapskates shopping for assassin's at Goodwill?

For a target like Trump, first class airplane tickets are peanuts. He is easily a $50,000 minimum in untraceable cash target.

If they put a hit out on him, there will be at least 2 gunmen for the event. To ensure the kill and to obfuscate, just like JFK.

We're dealing with John Hinckley Jr's, not Lee Harvey Oswalds.

a reply to: BingoMcGoof

Agree that Vance is looking more like a Trojan Horse, as you say.
(When first typed, I wrote "hors". Perhaps subconsciously, I was meant to write "whore"?)

I would suggest, though you may have meant to imply , that when you refer to "control of the entire economy", I would enhance that conclusion by clarifying it as control of the entire economy of the World".


"Games" at these levels are played for stakes that far exceed the cares, fates, and fortunes of mere countries.

Assassin Routh had a

BIDEN-HARRIS

Bumper Sticker on his Truck.

No doubt where his allegiance fell: www.thegatewaypundit.com...

Figures. 🤪

It makes more sense to me to use a radicalized citizen and hope for the best, rather than the "best of the best" marksman.