207 Comments

Below is a link to Brian Berletic's most recent post in which he discusses the attempted assassination of former President Trump. First, he uses his own military training to discuss the security errors of the Secret Service, in failing to protect Trump. Then he puts the whole incident in perspective: if it is a state-backed action, it is almost certainly intended to distract us from more important issues than the election.

It is a fact that both Biden and Trump have been President for nearly four years each, and they both did little to change the trajectory of foreign and domestic policy. We are dealing with a ruling class that wishes to dominate us, even kill us, via war and other state violence, and subject us to tyrannical control. They do not much care who is President, so long as they can get their way. We need to pry our attention away from the "Biden is a vegetable and Trump wants to be a dictator" show and consider the real powers that be, such as the Pharma industry, the big Tech companies, the Military contractors who benefit from endless war, etc. We need to get their grubby hands off our constitutional republic and return the power to the people.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6-z0PqTKeU&list=WL&index=1&t=906s

Expand full comment

This is an excellent comment! Thank you.

My thoughts have been tending toward the understanding that through the expansion and intrusion of technology-- which includes the technology of behavioral modification and "nudging"-- the powers-that-be can now manufacture reality for us. The goal of this is simply the expansion and intrusion of the many facets of technology into living systems, without informed consent, with huge profits foreseen.

That's what this whole global alliance, G3P, is about. Rule of men and women who control technology, backed by bankers, and not rule of law designed to protect life, liberty and property. They want to be able to do whatever they want to--vaccinate the entire world, warmonger, monitor everyone, spray the skies, etc.-- reap the profits, maybe kill off people so not so many to control. Not because they're right, but because they can.

We need to make the individual sovereign over their own lives. We need individual opacity, government transparency. We need to make it a crime to use technology to control populations or individuals, beyond common-sense and historical measures to protect life, liberty, and property.

Technology is expanding exponentially: the profits are there. So, too, is massive potential for abuse and control.

Expand full comment

In other words, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." The man before the podium, whoever it may be, is a distraction... put there to pretend that they are leading the parade. Former presidents, current president, our elected representatives, deep in the bureaucratic reside nefarious forces that THINK they know better than what they view as sock puppets elected by the hoi polloi in democratic elections.

Those nefarious forces? May they all burn in Hell.

Expand full comment

Yes 👏

Expand full comment

👍👍👍

Expand full comment

It’s hard to know for sure what she was doing and why, but not only was she super calm and filming Trump when the shooting started, she kept looking in the direction of the shooter BEFORE the shots were fired. Hmmm

Expand full comment

that, is what, worries me. not unlike the dancing Israelis. does anyone know who she is?

Expand full comment

Does anyone know who you & your dancing Israelis are? Age the ones dancing during rocket attacks?

Expand full comment

they were a group of confirmed celebratory mossad agents who on live TV in Israel, explained that they were there to document the 9/11 attacks on the world trade center buildings. they were arrested at the time, and let go.

Expand full comment

Yes. They were Mossad agents

Expand full comment

maybe this one it too. academic psychology book by Crooks and Baur, called “mind tap” can anyone confirm this crooks is the fatherof trump shooter ? name matthew crooks?

MindTap® Psychology, 1 term (6 months) Instant Access for Crooks/Baur' Our Sexuality, 13th Edition

Expand full comment

Keep in mind, wider angle videos reveal that Trump had been looking in that direction also before he got shot. Perhaps, she was trying to see what the man behind the podium was looking at. As an earlier commenter Debby posited, it would indeed be helpful if the woman could be identified. Also revealing that her sign appeared to be about some other advocacy issue besides the Trump campaign - positioned to the left of the former president as seen by those in front of him, she may have been positioned to get that sign on full view of the cameras the former president was facing.

Too much to unravel here. Everything remains on the table until we know more.

Expand full comment

Watch the longer video. Trump says can we get a look at the immigration data and he looks to the side at the screen and comments on it.

Expand full comment

Her sign said, "You're fired Joe Biden," just like many others had. Have you ever watched Trump? He speaks to the whole crowd, turning both his head and body.

She does seem suspicious, but you seem to be focusing on the innocuous.

Expand full comment

It is that animated oratory that saved him. A 120-yard head shot is not a gimme even if shooting at a motionless dummy— like, for instance, a Brandon at the lectern. But hitting a guy in motion takes some luck.

Expand full comment

Whoa, now that is totally creepy. She did seem to be waiting for the moment. Who is she?, Should not be very hard to find out.

Expand full comment

Exactly. The head turn to the right was purposely done to look for something down that line of sight.

Expand full comment

Probably thinking, "Come on man, shoot the Yellowman"!

Expand full comment

But the young boy behind her was looking to the right, as well. Trump was referencing -- & motioning to -- something to the right, which is why his head was turned that way. This doesn't look suspicious to me, & I saw it the day of the shooting. I just think younger people, especially, are programmed to FILM, whenever something happens these days.

Expand full comment

It's increasingly looking like the shooter was ALLOWED to get into position and fire at Trump from 150 yards with what is being described as an "easy" head shot. The Secret Service has no answer for this. It's a miracle that Trump is alive. Please see my own substack from earlier today. They have been after Trump now for almost eight years.

https://montanarcc.substack.com/p/trump-assassination-attempt-forecast

Expand full comment

Tore Maras noticed that after the duck-down that lady did a quick masonic hand signal (kinda like the OK sign)--I saw her re-play it in slo-mo, purdy bizarre...

ps the hand gesture is out of frame in the cropped X clip ya shared--in the wider shots not cropped it's below her "poster"...

Expand full comment

Please share the wider clip

Expand full comment

https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/tore-maras-analysis-of-the-assassination-attempt/

She starts at about the 21 min. mark analyzin' the footage -- she goes on for some time coverin' the different angles etc...well worth the watch (1.5 speed helps!)

Expand full comment

This makes me even more sick than I already was.

Expand full comment

I didn't see much in that 26 second video. No wider perspective shown. Have no idea what we are seeing other than a woman with a cell phone. Gee, how unusual these years. Stop promoting conspiracies when we have no information.

Expand full comment

No one is promoting conspiracies. Some of us, who are very familiar with firearms and sniper methods and accuracy, are looking at the video and photographic evidence and evidence presented by other onsite witnesses and concluding what actually took place. This is no longer 1963. when such evidence was not so readily prevalent.

Expand full comment

Arrest her. Looks like operative working with assassin

Expand full comment

This is the problem with the Right--always making assumptions and calling for attacks. Can't even wait for factual information to be reported.

Expand full comment

It was an assassination attempt of a former President! Not a stolen bike.

Expand full comment

No, it was an assassination attempt of a Presidential candidate who was about to be anointed by his party this week

Expand full comment

Why are we assuming it was meant to really take him out? To me that seems way too risky, politically and otherwise. What am I missing?

Expand full comment

Do you think that someone would plan to shoot at Trump's head with the intention of only nicking his ear AND with the likelihood of that someone being killed in the process?

Expand full comment

There are many possibilities here. Do I know for sure who fired the shots and what type of projectile they were firing? Many things aren’t adding up so I wouldn’t make too many assumptions yet about what happened or why. Sometimes the obvious explanation is not the right one.

Expand full comment

Okay, let's lock up everyone with a cell phone as well. Am sure this woman was not the only one taking shots--pun intended.

Expand full comment

Her cell records should have a warrant on them.

Expand full comment

Am quite sure our surveillance State already has such records.

Expand full comment

Thanks for an intelligent, meaningful insight.

Expand full comment

Her substack says it all. As Marcuse would highlight, women may be social constructs but with the feminine ways, useful idiots.

Expand full comment

Is this comment pure insanity or just straight up sexisem!

Expand full comment

Free speech sucks, doesn't it?

Expand full comment

Nice try. Saul Alinsky would be proud of you... accusing "the right" of the exact same thing "the left" does as a matter of regular protocol. "always making assumptions and calling for attacks" is straight out of the democrat playbook. (And I dislike both parties, btw. But the dems are far more dangerous to this country at the moment.) I bet you will harp on "the fact" that the shooter was a registered republican next (even though he apparently donated to progressive political organizations. He likely registered repub to help throw the primary; plenty of democrats have admitted to that strategy.).

Expand full comment

I see, you dislike both Parties but sound like a right wing devotee. Your bias/prejudice is quite clear.

And because of your prejudice you will not read that the $15.00 donation this kid made when 17 yrs old, illegally, to an organization that was barely Democratic and proved to be nothing but a self-serving money maker. There was no progressive connection with this kid as anyone has reported.

Perhaps you need to check your information sources a lot better and with more honesty. Then you can talk about being 'neutral.'

As for the two main Parties? I might even agree to some degree that the Dems are more dangerous but only because they support the same fascism as the GOP but they do it more quietly. However, the Right base loves the braggart, angry talk of the extreme Right ignoring its fascist calls and efforts to destroy any democratic principle of decision-making and policies. They just hide in the open as opposed to hiding in the shadows.

Expand full comment

I am aware of the donation (which I was going to cite in my comment but decided not to). The kid's intent WAS to donate to a progressive organization, no matter how legit or not it turned out to be. (So you have a non-argument there.) I AM biased... toward lawful society without tyranny, which is why at the moment I have more sympathy toward and with republicans in general. See how that works? Feel free to impeach my honesty and character as much as you like, but democrats = desire for more .gov control over the individual; republicans = less .gov control over the individual. If that makes me a "right-wing devotee" (as those sentiments USED to be associated more with actual liberals!), then I am guilty as charged. "its fascist calls and efforts to destroy any democratic principle of decision-making and policies," you say? (Just like what I see on MSNBC / CNN.) And what/where are those examples specifically? All I see is that democrats want to centralize power (anti-democratic by nature) in fedgov as well as censor free speech (including criticism of COVID response, fake vaccines, etc. never mind institute their knee-jerk, vacuous political correctness / woke-ism). And there is all the lawlessness, open border sabotage of our national security, etc. that the dems are rockin'. I was raised as a non-religious fiscal conservative and then sharply turned democrat-voter after the 9/11 false flag attack, btw. But by the end of Obama's first term I realized that we have little more than a uniparty controlled by the same elites (hence Ron Paul support after that). Trump is no magic bullet either (and likely has a string or two pulled by these same elites), but at least he can be held accountable and takes *SOME* actions in defense of our nation, including trying to free us from MIC control. He has *some* sort of a positive track record. Indeed, it is a hold-your-nose-and-vote election, as you no doubt know.

Expand full comment

Factual information?

Are you joking? From the media or the government … since when?

Expand full comment

Right! Here are some "facts" we've been told....the covid injections are safe, the covid injections are effective, the covid virus came from a chinese wet market, the covid injections stay in the injection site, nobody has died as the result of a covid injection, Epstein killed himself, the 2020 election was the most secure election ever held....

The only thing we KNOW is true is that what our media and govt tells us is what they wish us to believe.

Expand full comment

In fact this is not true. There are many independent investigative journalists who take no corporate money and are not connected to the mainstream media. How about learning about them and reading what they have to say.

Expand full comment

You are pretty slick, lady. You know what the commenter meant there or that he/she/it was being sarcastic. What is your purpose here? Merely to distract or muddy waters? Who / what outlets do YOU trust? Please share info or else stop wasting people's time with your emotional interjections and word-twisting hijinks.

Expand full comment

So who will you believe? What are the standards you use?.

Expand full comment

You first. Please teach us.

Expand full comment

And how will we know when factual information has been reported?

Expand full comment

As var as truth goes, we’re still working on 1963

Expand full comment

"Factual information" reported by whom? Do you expect to get factual information reported by the Obama/Biden three letter agencies? Always better to do your own investigating. There are lots of interested parties out there willing to provide any evidence they may have.

Expand full comment

How about listing who you trust?

Expand full comment

Are you replying to me? If so, I don't necessarily trust anyone; but, that doesn't mean that I can't look at any evidence they might provide.

Expand full comment

You first.

Expand full comment

I wouldn't read too much into that, Dr. Nass.

I think the level of incompetence we've seen so far suffices to explain a lot of this.

(If the US government could botch the Afghanistan withdrawal as it did, what would make anyone think it could protect one of the major candidates during a presidential campaign?)

Expand full comment

You don't think Afghanistan withdrawal smelled like the weapons transfers through Tripoli, Libya?

Expand full comment

I don't think anyone wanted to see people falling out of the sky off of US Air Force transports; even if we wanted to transfer weapons as you suggest, it could have been done without the amount of gross incompetence on display in Kabul. (We didn't simply leave US arms and equipment behind, we left European nationals behind, who had to be flown out by their own military helicopters after the US left. You can bet now that every international operation involving the US is going to include a backup plan to cover our incompetence.)

Expand full comment

You probably were not around for the departure from Saigon

Expand full comment

I was around. We brought everyone and their brother in law out of Saigon. There were so many South Vietnamese flying out to the ships that sailors were pushing helicopters off the deck into the South China Sea to make room for the next wave of helicopters.

I also remember the Biden administration telling us that the withdrawal from Kabul would be nothing like the withdrawal from Saigon.

Expand full comment

It also acts as demoralization, like having a senile president that embarrasses the nation, or an open border.

Expand full comment

Oh Tamenund - you are totally underestimating their evil intentions. Afghan withdrawal was a weapons transfer. And this assassination attempt was an inside job. Wake up.

Expand full comment

I'm sorry.

Whether or not the Afghanistan withdrawal was a weapons transfer has nothing to do with the sorry spectacle of Afghanis in sandals clinging to US transports and then falling out of the sky. That was an absolute outrage; there should have been firings and resignations over it.

Why is this assassination attempt any more of an inside job than any other assassination attempt? (Read history; the ingredients are always the same: a misfit, a weapon, and an opportunity.)

Expand full comment

Why would there have been any firings and resignations over Afghanis falling out of the sky? Our U.S. government (including the U.S. military) is currently killing U.S citizens within the U.S. in its goal of genocidal depopulation. This has been going on for years.

Expand full comment

Because the "greatest country in the world" looked really, really stupid.

Expand full comment

I was just thinking the same thing. Who truly believes in a Lone Gunman theory to any of this stuff. “I’m just a patsy” says it all. And one look at Crooks—he’s the patsy straight out of central casting. Probably an MKUltra victim, poor sod.

Expand full comment

YOU read history.

Kennedy: A speech about bringing down the global secret societies.

Trump: Same. Bringing down the deep state. Oh they cannot have THAT.

No difference.

Expand full comment

They should've learned that from Viet Nam.

Expand full comment

⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️

Expand full comment

First, the Afghan withdrawal was done that way on purpose, second, "incompetence" is a great cover. "Oh we screwed up"

Expand full comment

Without a doubt...ON PURPOSE!

Expand full comment

Amen.

Expand full comment

I was skeptical of people saying there were some odd things about this event--but the lady in the video obviously knows ahead of time whats about to happen and is there to get it on video. How can that be explained?

Expand full comment

I think that woman is a distraction and not even important. All kinds of speculation can be generated from that video. Other facts about that event are far more important.

Expand full comment

If this woman thought someone was going to take even one potshot at DJT, then there's no way she's putting herself anywhere near the guy. (Let's not forget that there were three other people in the stands near Trump that were hit, one of them fatally and one of them apparently in pretty bad shape.)

Expand full comment

Videographer was not in line of fire. That was her job.

Expand full comment

Respectfully, I don't think you have experience with any firearms.

I would be more inclined to think she was on a medication of some sorts and oblivious to those taking cover in the stands near her than to think she was the woman on the grassy knoll.

Expand full comment

You don't know shit about me, so stop assuming you do.

Expand full comment

I have a lot of experience with firearms, so don't try that on excuse on me.

This woman knows she's out of the line of fire and she also knows that an experienced marksman will not hit her. The question is: where exactly was the 20-year-old shooter was there a second shooter...a marksman who hit Trump's ear? -- I'll wait to see overhead diagrams of where everyone was positioned. Those will have to become public at some point. My bet is that it was the 20-year old who shot people other than Trump. The Secret Service sniper who shot him said he was not given permission to kill that kid until that kid had fired off his 8 to 10 round.

Expand full comment

I don't believe there exists a shooter in the world good enough to pull off that ear shot on a randomly moving target intentionally from 3 ft, let alone 140 yards.

In another video I saw, one round ruptured a hydraulic line on a piece of equipment down range from the stage and it sprayed hydraulic fluid into the air as the load it was holding up (maybe a speaker bank?) descended. I'm not gonna buy anyone "staging" or faking an assassination in such fantastical detail as to include that as a bit of theater. I've seen a hydraulic line on a lift truck rupture under a load in the real world so I won't be bullshitted into believing I didn't see that.

Expand full comment

I get what you're stating with respect to pulling off the moving ear shot intentionally; but, I don't understand your point about the hydraulic line rupture and what it has to do with the ear shot.

However, there is the possibility that the ear shot was meant by an experienced sniper to be a kill shot; but, ended up being only an ear nick when Trump moved his head. OR, the nick to Trump's ear was somehow intentionally made in some other manner.

As an interesting aside, you probably have read about Carlos Hathcock, who allegedly killed an enemy sniper at 500 yards by shooting through the enemy's scope via the sunlight glaring off that scope? Sometime later, a group of researchers confirmed that such a shot was indeed possible.. Hathcock holds the Marine Corps record for the longest confirmed kill shot at 1.4 miles.

Expand full comment
Jul 15Edited

I think he was meant to die, then chaos would breakout and more agent provocateurs could commit acts of terrorism. Providing the playbook in Obama Administration’s 2009 DHS white paper on probable domestic extremism. They named the enemies ahead of time: veterans, prolife groups, 2nd Amendment groups. (Constitutionalists and Christians)

Expand full comment

Yes. I believe the kid was meant to fire off a few rounds before being taken out by the Secret Service, while a real sniper took out Trump from a much further distance using highly accurate sniper rifle fitted with a suppressor.

Expand full comment

Or another agency placed sniper. It doesn’t have to be SS.

Expand full comment

Excuse the typos, it’s late.

Expand full comment

Yes...me too...I need to get to bed here on the East Coast. (-:

Expand full comment

Did he have a scope? Easy shot? I don’t think so. Who has he been training with? Decoy? Maybe.

Expand full comment

That's why I'm doubtful that the bullet which hit Trump's ear was fired by the kid. It was just too good of a shot for that distance. And, you are right: he well could have been a decoy. All I know, so far, is it's been said the kid had an AR-15; so, I'm assuming just an ordinary run of the mill rifle with maybe a scope, but more likely not, unless the rifle was provided to him. Anyway, unlikely that it was a genuine sniper rifle and doubtful how well sighted in it was. Who knows, if it was provided to him, and if there was a second marksman shooter, the alleged AR-15 could have been purposely sighted to be highly inaccurate.

Expand full comment

So far this is the most logical comment. I would not be sitting behind Trump, that’s for sure.

Expand full comment

The shooter is to Trump's right. Look at the video above. Trump's head is already turned very far to the right. To hit Trump's right ear, without having the bullet go through or graze Trump's head, the bullet has to come from Trump's extreme right and pass behind his head to hit the ear. The bullet then continued to the right, in the plane of the video, without touching the right side of Trump's head.

Expand full comment

Why not? She was NOT in the line of fire. She knew where the shooter was coming from - that's why she keeps looking to her right. In anticipation. So she can quickly put down her sign and pick up her phone.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Jul 15Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Yes, and how difficult would it be these days of "unexplained deaths" (from the rubbery obstructions) to solicit for an act such as this one? If someone is given the grim diagnosis of having only a few months to live due to something related to the C shots, would it not be a no brainer to assume that for some compensation for his remaining family members, that he might consider such a deed?

It's just a distant thought, but one which IS possible. We just don't know who is affiliated with whom. Someday, it will all be possible to KNOW of the details, with all the obscurity removed, but until that day when Truth can be ascertained, it's impossible to know at this point.

Ray

Expand full comment

In my opinion, incompetence in protecting, in respecting isn't even on the table. It's just power and money changing hands.

Expand full comment

While I wish you were correct and the Dems are toast, I fear this may not be the case. When the lockdown madness happened, and my kid started spewing CRT, I started listening to philosophy lectures. Starting with the ones from the 80s, I graduated from James Lindsay and others. Once you grasp the philosophy of Hegel and his dialectic reasoning, you can grasp how to be anti-racist means you must be racist. (thesis/anti-thesis with utopia to emerge.) You get Herbert Marcuse's Repressive Tolerance essay, where movements of the left are to be tolerated even if violent, but those on the right must be stopped at their inception. So, to be Democratic, one must be anti-Democratic. To be just, one must be unjust. Effective altruist theorist Peter Singer acknowledged in a 1987 interview that with Hegel, if you go right, you get Hitler, and if you go left, you get Stalin. Either way, you get brutal authoritarianism and millions of deaths.

Expand full comment

Ray’s Substack

In my opinion, the "plannedemic" was a well-arranged, thought out plan to observe the public's reaction, in order to make future adjustments to attempts to do likewise sometime soon. I'm sure they're pleased with how that all went. Regarding President Trumps position at that time, seems to be coincidental, but worked into the hands of the "shadow" operatives.

Now here's my deeper personal overview: Picture a "pendulum" which swings in opposite directions and is usually on the move, in one direction or the opposite, yet at differing speeds and with sporadic "slow-downs" or interruptions.

Hegel looked at this and devised an application which would be useful to steer the masses in a direction not of their choosing. Causing one extreme (of the pendulum's swing) to create public desire for a "corrective" swing, he reasoned that to bring about a condition, a "thesis" (one extreme) must be experienced, as well as an "antithesis," (the other extreme), so as to bring about the desired "SYNTHESIS". This is simple and logical, but requires the implementation of propaganda machinery. This of course, requires time, infiltration for cooperation, money and planning and adjusting as plans are implemented and their results observed and confirmed.

It goes a level deeper. There is a Satanic plot which undergirds ALL of this evil underhandedness. The banksters, the "operatives" who assemble and plan their moves are all Satanically driven and motivated, whether or not they know it. Most do know it, but choose to serve the devil in stead of Christ, in order to "collect" their portion of the bargaining agreement.

The entire world is struggling with this "worship" call. It seems that Satan has over-run the battle-field with his advantages, but he will eventually be removed and killed and peace and tranquility will once again pervade the universe. This is something to share with others, and to drink of nightly (and daily) as a means of refreshment and a faith-inducing and strengthening world-view.

Deception is rampant. Read the Trustworthy Prophecies of the Word of God for assurance.

May God be your Guide and Savior,

R

Expand full comment

Hmm…I’m not so sure this is terribly suspicious. She is looking around all over before it happens and not just in that one direction. She is definitely calm, and yet isn’t it sort of our instinct now to grab our phone quickly (which most people likely had out anyway to film Trump) and film things especially of this significance? A lot of people appeared to be filming it. Just my thoughts! :)

Expand full comment

My point, exactly. And others were looking to the right, as was Trump because he was referencing something on the right side.

Expand full comment

I suspect the next few days are going to be interesting, and amusing, like Biden coming out and telling us we need to get along, and violence isn't the American way.

Expand full comment

I'm sure people will be excruciating the minutiae of this day for years to come

What I certainly know is that the media has been preprogramming this for some time now... https://eccentrik.substack.com/p/are-they-preparing-to-assassinate

Expand full comment

It won't open for me!

Expand full comment

I just viewed it, pretty incriminating.

Expand full comment

It won’t open for me either. I think it has been disabled.

Expand full comment

Every major assassination or false flag has these types of people that are given intel and their job is to catch it on camera.

On 9/11, one of the dancing Israelis said “Our purpose was to document the event.”

Expand full comment

.

Exploiting The Desperation

Of Liberals

To A Person

Never Fails.

.

Expand full comment

also at 19 seconds in this blackrock commercial. https://www.ispot.tv/ad/1Yrl/blackrock-inc-ap-and-honors-economics

Expand full comment