Hey fellars. I guess I'm one of those "been here a long time" (18 years), and low message count (109) guys. Mostly because I typically come here (and ARFCOM, Longrangehunting, 24hourcampfire, accurateshooter, etc) to read and learn, regarding precision shooting. Also until recently just busy with a heavy workload career in Engineering/Operations/Systems (retired after 40 years end of 2022). I very much respect the wisdom and experience of you collectively and have learned a lot. Thank you. Please indulge me on a question.
Something's been nagging at me, that I haven't seen much discussion on. It's probably nothing. Without diving into the distraction of myriad conspiracy theory possibilities, wouldn't it be useful to determine, with certainty, whether the bullet that grazed DJT actually came from the shooter on the roof? It seems odd that a 20 year old dork, probably untrained, rushed by being spotted, probably with a 1x red dot, jacked up living his wet dream, etc, makes a cold bore 130 yard shot that close to center. An easy slam dunk for you guys I know, but I've seen plenty like that "person" at the range, rested with a higher power scope, with plenty of time, nearly always spray all over at much shorter distances. Maybe just luck.
The nagging part is that clear photo, capturing the actual bullet in flight just past DJT, a lengthy blur indicating a portion of it's actual trajectory. To me that is actual empirical evidence, related to one of the most important events in human history. Assuming of course the photo is genuine, and that's the same bullet that hit his ear. Looking at all the 3D rendering analyzing the timing of DJT's head turn makes me wonder. Could the trajectory of the bullet in the photo be traced back to it's origin? Not sure how one would account for azimuth just with that photo, but I'm no expert. Elevation alone might be telling. Can it be done?
If that trajectory led, for example, to a spot in the brush, and the dweeb was just cover for a real assassin, seems that would be important.
Obviously I don't write here much. What spurred me was a CNN article, with audio analysis of the gunshots, concluding (iirc) three from the shooter, five quick responses, then later the suppressed final shot. I thought, now why in the world would CNN be doing audio analysis....? I've learned that when CNN says something, just immediately assume the opposite is true. Works pretty well, and again it made me wonder about the shot.
Food for thought if nothing else.