Offthemat

I might have read a little about the accidental shot theory in this book. As I recall, there was no evidence offered to support the theory, no film of anyone reacting to the shot; no reports; never an admission; just theory. This book is the one recommended by RFK Jr. for anyone wanting to know what happened. I picked it up during Trump’s first term when I saw similarities between his and JFK’s predicaments. It is very thorough. I don’t doubt that it can happen, I don’t think it did in this instance.

That’d leave RL for Behar. Sounds right.

I don’t distinguish between military and civilian because they are essentially the same. I’ve read a little about the accidental shot theory somewhere, but I don’t agree with the shot from behind causing the head to move backwards theory.

Audio forensics are questionable. A slight change of position of either the shooter or the microphone can cause different sounds. It may be useful in support of other evidence but it’s not definitive on its own. I want to know how many empty casings have been found that match the shooter’s weapon; how many are left in the magazine?

Amazing! I wonder if she can drive a snowplow. https://www.campusreform.org/article/carnegie-mellon-university-prof-says-trump-assassination-attempt-staged-like-stupid-tubi-movie-set/25903

I haven’t read the book but have read numerous others and don’t consider the theory credible. Plenty of us are curious about it, but so far, only one shot has been attributed to a leo. The last one. The shooter was probably using .223; the leo maybe .308.

Which one is whoopty?

Could it have involved the exchange rate of yuan?

It’s a sure way to have your voice ignored. Your derangement syndrome is getting the best of you. Trump didn’t choose the Republicans, the Republican voters chose him, out of about sixteen candidates. And many who thought he was a fake were surprised when he did what he said he’d do. Proving the voters had chosen wisely.

We have what you want in the form of primaries. Multiple candidates compete for the nomination and you’re welcome to vote for any you like. Trump is proof that it works. He never had the support of the party establishment yet enough citizens supported him to win. I didn’t say anybody should vote for the candidate who has the best chance to win, did I? I said: “ I’ll vote for the candidate who most closely aligns with my desires and has a chance to win.”

Would like to know who paid for that poster.

In effect it just removes that voice from the decision, leaving it for other voters to decide. It’s neither noble nor serious. There will be critical decisions to be made and a general direction to go, I’ll vote for the candidate who most closely aligns with my desires and has a chance to win. That’s what’s in my best interest.

With a take you just don’t get outside of joy reid or the view.

Was just kinda joking about the clown thing, but as for the voting against their own best interest thing, some people vote for the candidate that has no chance thinking it is somehow in their best interest.

I’m about fed up with you denigrating circus clowns. Have you met some of the people who vote? There’s a reason they call it the House of Representatives and the Senate is no different, at least since the 17th Amendment passed.

You mean demanding accountability or business as usual.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/14/politics/video/doug-mills-trump-rally-photo-src-digvid

The answer should be the same either place, but rumblings are that Mayorkas is trying to block the subpoena and she’s being told to keep her mouth shut.