VIDEO shows Trump assassin-wannabe taking position on roof

First let me show you this, a new video, posted on Fox News, of the moments before the attempted assassination of President Trump.

The video was shot by James Copenhaver, one of the victims critically wounded in the July 13th "incident" at Butler PA, all mention of which Google has tried to descrub from its search engine database. 

You can see (circled) a figure moving across the roof of the American Glass Research (AGR) building just minutes before gunfire rang out at the Trump rally. In the video taken at 1808 EDT, the person appears on the roof of the building adjacent to where Mr Trump is speaking and can be seen walking from the 1:00 second mark to about the 2:50 second mark. 

Officials believe that person is gunman Thomas Crooks, who began shooting with a collapsible AR-15-style rifle three minutes later. Counter snipers fatally shot Mr Crooks shortly -- very shortly -- afterward, and law enforcement officials found eight shell casings near his body. 

A commenter on X asks why Mr Crooks wasn't "dealt with". Another replies that he was a patsy, being set up to do the dirty deed after which he would be "dealt with" by the Secret Service who already had him in their sights, even while he was running across the roof to take up his position. 

Now let me quote from "Attempted assassination of President Trump: Who is responsible?" (WWW, 13/7/24). 

"Has a cover-up already begun?

"Let's suppose that the shooter was (a) an Islamic (or other) terrorist; (b) a looney leftist, antifa type; (c) an agent of the Deep State; or even (d) a sufferer from TDS, nuttier than squirrel shit and determined that there should be no second term for Trump. 

"Would the Deep State, the Democrats and their lickspittle media want you to know this? If they want to cover their sorry asses, how would they do so? Simple. By assassinating the would-be assassin. So far, what we're hearing from Official Sources is that the threat has been "contained". Whatever can that mean? Stay tuned... but don't hold your breath!"

My emphasis added. That conspiracy theory -- for such it is -- was denounced by the lickspittle media before the day was out, although not by the Secret Service or other agents of Deep State until later. Walt doesn't think it's so far-fetched. Do you?

Attempted assassination of President Trump: Who is responsible?

You've heard the news. You may be watching the news right now. About 75 minutes ago someone shot Donald J. Trump, the once and future POTUS, during a rally in Butler County PA. 

Your immediate reaction, like mine, must surely have been: who did this? That's a question which may never be answered!

10 minutes ago I watched, on NBC, a live interview with a person who said she was sitting right in the front row. After she confirmed what we saw in the video, the interviewee said "Thank God they killed rthe shooter", who she said had fired from a tower somewhere to the right Mr Trump.

Strange, isn't it, that no official source had said anything about that. Immediately the interview concluded, Lester Holt said that this was just the account of one person which could not be confirmed. Has a cover-up already begun?

Let's suppose that the shooter was (a) an Islamic (or other) terrorist; (b) a looney leftist, antifa type; (c) an agent of the Deep State; or even (d) a sufferer from TDS, nuttier than squirrel shit and determined that there should be no second term for Trump. Would the Deep State, the Democrats and their lickspittle media want you to know this?

If they want to cover their sorry asses, how would they do so? Simple. By assassinating the would-be assassin. So far, what we're hearing from Official Sources is that the threat has been "contained". Whatever can that mean? Stay tuned... but don't hold your breath!

UPDATE ADDED at 1930: It is now four hours since the failed assassination attempt. The shooter is dead, having been shot by a Secret Service sniper within seconds of shooting at President Trump from "an elevated position" (read: tower) about 200 yards from the podium (yet somehow outside the secure perimeter). 

The body of the shooter has been recovered, along with his AR-15 assault rifle, but he remains unidentified. More accurately, no-one is prepared to tell us what the government knows. Commentator on CBS to interviewee: "You've called this an 'attempted assassination'. Surely you're not implying that the government was somehow involved... are you?" Interviewee: "Oh no. No no."

What 's in the "Ukrainian phone calls" that warrants impeachment?

Short answer: Nothing!

Walt's longer answer begings with this quote from "How the impeachment process is supposed to work" (WWW 24/9/19): In the case of impeaching a sitting president, the House of Representatives can call for impeachment to begin if they believe that the president is guilty of “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” according to the Constitution.

Q. What kind of "high crimes and misdemeanors" do the Dumbocrats now say Still-President Trump has committed?
A. Well, he had a telephone conversation (or two or three) with Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine, in which he "solicited interference" in the 2020 election.
Q. What kind of interference?
A. Well, he wanted Mr Zelensky to investigate the business dealings in Ukraine of Old Joe Biden's sprog, Hunter.
Q. And that would be a crime in what way?
A. Well... errr... that would have been for the President's personal gain.
Q. In what way?
A. Well... errrrr....

The key word there is "personal gain". I think what the Founding Fathers had in mind, when they wrote the Constitution, was personal pecuniary gain, of the sort that resulted in the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, the successor to President U.S. Grant. How President Trump would have gained from an investigation into the affairs of Hunter Biden is less than clear to me, unless they mean that such investigation would have somehow led to Mr Trump's re-election to a second term, which would have earned him another four years making a salary considerably less than he could have earned in speaking fees alone had he not been re-elected.

Ed. I think that is what they mean.
Q. I see. Anything else?
A. Well, yes. He tried to cover up the phone call(s) by "locking down" records of the call(s) in a security system designed to protect state secrets. Doing so posed a serious threat to the security of the Paranoid States of America, and we would never have known about it had a so-far-anonymous whistleblower not made a complaint which Joseph Maguire, the Director of National Intelligence [sic], sat on for a couple of days before sending it to the Department of Justice and, ultimately, the White House.
Q. Where are those records now?
A. Well... errr... they've been declassified and released to the public.

Yesterday, the Chairman of the House Intelligence [sic] Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), grilled Mr Maguire on why he (Maguire) initially withheld a copy of the complaint from lawmakers, choosing to notify the DoJ and White House first. This was wrong, the Dems say, because the President was the subject of the complaint and Attorney General William Barr was mentioned by Mr Trump during the controversial phone call.

Mr Maguire insisted he is "not partisan" and "not political," reminding the panel that he served under eight presidents and has taken the oath of office 11 times. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), says he and Mr Barr are part of "the cover-up of the cover-up".
Q. Seriously?
A. Very seriously. That's what she told Joe Scarborough on MSNBC's Morning Joe today, when he asked if she was concerned that the country's institutions could fail due to Barr's behaviour.

You couldn't make this stuff up. Looks to me like a clear case of the Dumbocrats trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. No. More like trying to make something out of nothing. As Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) told America's Newsroom, "Washington is always a circus, but this is three rings with all the clowns and it's nuts right now."

Further reading: "Andrew Cuomo says 'leftist' Dems pressured Pelosi on impeachment, warns it will go 'nowhere'", by Andrew Shaw, Fox News, 28/9/19.