In the video below of a gruff cameraman who throws local-Butler police under the bus, he seems to be making the claim that, while he has spotted the shooter on the roof, and captured him with his camera, he himself witnessed a police officer looking onto the roof, seeing Crooks with gun, then falling to the ground. There's problems with this story. For one, a man cannot climb to the roof from where Mr. Gruff had his camera pointed, at the north-west corner of the glass factory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVHvYl_THXU

That's why the deep state concocted a story in which a second man allowed the police officer to get onto his shoulder in order to allow him to reach the roof (13 feet off the ground on west side) with his hands, then do a pull-up to check for a shooter on the roof. Smell anything wrong here? There's guys on the lawn supposedly saying they see a man on the roof with gun, and so can you imagine a cop being so stupid as to pull his body up with both hands to that his head pops up over the roof line, and he doesn't have a third hand to grab his gun to protect himself? This is like the Three Stooges show.

Secondly, we have never seen Gruff's video. Only the still shot is shown that's in the video above. Thirdly, he offers no footage of the police officer he says he saw climb to the roof. ??? Gruff's own words; "one police officer tried to climb up onto the roof, and when he got up there...he had a hold of the roof with both hands...so he just let go and fell to the ground..."

The police officer who's likely going to get the credit for this "climb" to the roof is the one seen at 1:25 of this presentation of the Stewart video, as he's about to turn the south-west corner. The problem is, Gruff is under a tree beyond where this officer is shown at the corner of the roof, but we see no commotion there in this video, hear no commotion, because there was none. It's fabricated. The camera's mic is only 200 feet from Gruff, or about the width of three small bungalows end-to-end i.e. easy to hear excited voices. Nobody is hearing those excited voices in this picture.

By the way, this Stewart video, as presented by the youtube channel, Matt Lautner, is of very poor quality, tending to reveal that the video owner is an insider privy to this assassination hoax. There are clearer videos than this one. The video goes especially blurred just before and after the gunshots begin.

While on this Stewart video, note that the peak of the roof can be seen at first, but that the cameraman appears to squat down to one knee when the horse rides by, one minute before pow-time. The fact that the horse's head aligns with the roof line suggests he's squatted. Soon after the horse passes, the camera is in line with the roof sheeting, with peak hard to see if it can be seen at all, suggesting he's stood up but walked a couple of steps toward the building. In other words, he looks like an insider who was told not to show the peak, with a minute to go, in case the person(s) setting up the paint job and dummy can be spotted over the peak.

The cameraman is apparently the man in red on the right half of the screen, seen running. He appears in this video three or four seconds before pow-time, already running to his right, like he's to get out of the way of some shots fired. How else can we explain that he's running before the shots rang out?

Now, take a look at this video where there could possibly be flashes at the end of a gun barrel, in the very window in which the Stewart cameraman was standing in front of, before and after the horse rode by. To speed things up, start shortly before the third minute, but watch at least until the middle of the sixth minute, and know first that the owner of this video channel does not entertain doctored video for this faked assassination because he's not inclined to view this as a faked assassination:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcOSaPGuUVo

The owner of this Paramount Tactical video thinks that the many flashes, per frame, that are always at the window, cannot be from a gun because the flashes appear over a three-quarter second period when there is no gun shot. But as this is a doctored video, likely, the off-timing can be easily explained. In my Stewart video, the first flash is at 3:11, soon after the eighth shot. But one can make the case that the video was stopped after the 8th shot, and then the camera spliced in the video from first three shots, but only the flashes, without the sound. I'll come back to this below; you might be surprised at what I've found.

Paramount Tactical is pretty sure that the bright light at the window is a solar reflection, though he ought to know that the sun is not shining on this window. I don't think he honestly believes it's a reflection off of some item worn or carried by a person along the fence line, because he can see that, at one point, in his third frame (5:51), the light begins to go off the glass, onto the window frame, in which case a glass reflection is ruled out. Paramount Tactical doesn't mention this because he's at times dishonest when he doesn't want to incriminate anyone.

This flash in the third frame, through to about the sixth frame, can be tentatively assumed to be the hottest part of the gun flash, expected because these frames are near the start of the bullet's explosion. There's a second flash from the 12th to 17th frame, which begins nine frames after the first flash. As the speaker says that 20 frames is over one second, the two flashes are a half-second apart, which is about the time apart between the first and second of eight shots. While I agree that these lights are too large to be gun-barrel flashes, perhaps they used some Hollywood-style instrument used regularly to feign machine-gun fire or something.

If you return to the Stewart video I presented above, and get the youtube speed to quarter-speed, pause at 1:10 to see what looks like glare off of the same window where the flash will soon appear, which is one window to the right of the four pipes on the wall. We are now almost two minutes before pow-time. This glare off the window remains in the next second, at 1:11.

This might be a little hard to follow, then harder, but it's important. When you look at the closest part of this building to your body, only one or two roof-ridge lines will point to your body. Stop the video at 1:10, and note that the cameraman's body is pointed to by the third and fourth roof-ridge to the right of the big pipe. He's standing directly in front of those two ridge lines.

Next, if he walks left or right, the white thing reflecting on the glass will disappear. But it will not disappear of he merely turns the camera to his left, which is what he does. The thing reflecting to his head will still do so if all he does is turn the camera to the left, and so the camera will still record the reflection. He then shifts the camera to his right and returns to this same window five seconds later at 1:16. Stop the camera at 1:16 to see that the same two roof-ridge lines are still pointing to his body. His feet have not moved at all, yet the reflection in the glass is gone. Why?

Well, in consideration of the flash that will appear in about two minutes, it seems that someone arranged to remove the glass from the window from the inside in the five seconds from 1:11 to 1:16.

Would someone go to all that trouble to remove the outer window that opens outward, then install a pane of glass from the inside that can be easily removed from the inside? How often does the deep state fake an assassination?

At 3:06, when the string of five shots begins, the same window can be seen, and now it shows some definite reflection of light, though not from a specific object, just general glare. The point is, the glass pane is back on the window frame apparently after the first three shots. Would they take three shots from that window, then quickly put the glass back on? Makes sense. The last thing they want is for people to look and see no glass on a window, once the shooting task is done.

The ninth shot is at 3:08. Immediately after this, the camera goes to the grass, where it would be easy to splice in a section of the video captured earlier, but which was spliced out at the time it should have played. After the third shot is heard, the camera goes to the grass, at 3:05. And here it's at the grass again after the ninth shot. Some strange object appears at the end of 3:05 that looks like it shouldn't be there (need to put it on slow speed to see it).

When the camera surfaces from the grass at 3:11, the window flashes begin exactly at some sound that could have been a bullet cut out of the audio, but not completely. Paramount Tactical plays the idiot by claiming it's the "wind noise." He troubles me. He often comes across like a gate keeper whose job is partly to dispel conspiracy theories. Admittedly, the flashes look bouncy, but maybe it's due to the motion of the camera.

THE BIG POINT: ZERO GLASS GLARE at 3:11 when the flashes begin. There is glass glare for shots four through nine, glass glare before the shots begin, and glass glare elsewhere (e.g. at 5:59) but no glass glare when the flashes are seen. Forget Paramount Tactic, trust your own intuition. The flashes need explanation. By trying to dispel the flashes, Tactic helps me to see that they are suspicious.

It's not a wonder that the man holding the Stewart camera started running from standing in front of this window under discussion, just three or four seconds before we hear shots. Fair to say, where we hear the shots may not be exactly where the shots were fired in relation to the video we are seeing. All, or some, shots, may have been deleted, then added in again where the plotters thought best to facilitate their own agenda.

Now, pause the Stewart video above at 1:21. The cameraman is standing one to two feet to the right of where he is when the window has the reflection, but, at 1:21, there's no reflection...because, I assume, he moved over a foot or two. The light bouncing off the glass no longer bounces to his camera. When the reflection is seen, he's standing between three and four roof ridges to the right of the large pipe, but at 1:21, he stands between four and five roof ridges over the from pipe. Each roof ridge is about 1.5 feet from its direct neighbors. Just wanted to clarify this.

The glare on the glass that I talked about above may have been from a flood light near the stage. The reflection on the glass was about eight feet off the ground, and with the camera about six feet off the ground, this reflected light from almost directly behind him (but a little to his right) was coming in on a line passing about two feet above the cameraman's head (= slightly downward to the glass).

Assuming the cameraman was standing 30 feet from the glass, the in-coming light descended two feet over 30 feet across. As the stage was about 450 feet behind him, the thing reflecting off the glass, if it came from near the stage, was about as high as: 450 / 30 x 2 = 30 feet (= 2 feet of rise per 30 feet across). If he's 40 feet from the building, then the lights would be about: 450 / 40 x 2 = 22.5 feet high. The math works not-bad to describe flood lights on a pole, of the kind used for baseball games, for example.

After saying that, I loaded an aerial view to see where the reflection may have been coming from, and, at 5:10 of the video, we are on a drone over a barn where SS snipers were posted at the rally. Beside this barn we see what looks like a gas-powered generator that operates emergency flood lights (on a pole!) smack where the reflection could have come from, for we can even see the building's four pipes and the window under discussion, in the same view. The lights are on a pole that looks to be about 20 feet high.

Possibly, the sun was reflecting off of one of the round objects above the generator. However, it just seems like a long way for light from that small object to get to that wee and distant window we see, to cause any kind of impressionable reflection. But I see no other explanation, unless the flood lights at the gas generator can be turned on with regular electricity fed to it by a typical extension cord. The plotters near the stage, or the snipers on the barn, could have sent signals with one of the lights (remove bulbs from others).

Or, a sniper on the barn was shining a spread-out (mild, not dangerous) laser light into the window to indicate something to the plotters inside. At 6:09, we are roughly directly above where the snipers were posted. Can a laser-emitting tool be attached to rifle for combat purposes? Sounds logical. I estimate that the barn peak is about 25 feet high.

I'm not saying that Trump was shot from the window under discussion. I say that no bullets were fired at the stage, as my first choice until there is reason to believe otherwise. A faked assassination needs exactly zero bullets. Why complicate a faked assassination with real deaths / injuries of spectators when they too can be faked? "Faked shooting" is not in the vocabulary of Paramount Tactic. He acts oblivious to that theory.

In the video below, there is a suspicious news shot of Crooks early at the south side of the glass factory exactly at the window under discussion. This is suspicious because the entire top half of the picture is blocked by ABC matter, and it's the two story building that's blocked in case we'd like to know whether windows on the second story were open or closed at this time. Crooks appear on the south side of the building at 1:01. Playing the video from there, we see that he stands between the large pipes and the window. Two pipes are seen at 1:09 as he walks right to the window, apparently to check it out and/or get last-minute instructions and/or to alert the plotters inside that he's arrived on the set.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfmN5n4KxkM

By this time, three weeks after the event, youtube has scrubbed most-anything that goes contrary to the DEVELOPED = EVOLVED storyline. Any news organization that shows such contrariness gets a phone call from the FBI to remove the content, and youtube gets the call to bury the video. That's how they play. I do the news daily hoping to catch stories before the FBI watchers, who watch daily too, have the time to make the calls and get the videos buried.

Congress has yet to ask Beaver ESU to a question period, perhaps because it doesn't have jurisdiction to compel non-federal agencies to a question session. No news organization that tows the FBI line is expected to call BEAVER for an interview with Greg Nicol, the one in the second story who left his window post and made the shooting possible thereby.

In a normal, genuine situation, all news orgs would be rushing in madness to be the first one to nab an appearance of Nicol on their show. Right? Of course. But rather than shoot for ratings on this matter, all the news orgs have been warned by the FIB to follow orders, don't expose the story, let the FIB create / develop / evolve the storyline. Mainly, on key parts of the story, the media bosses know not to put out stories without the green light from FIB. And then video producers like Peak Prosperity repeat the fibs of the FIB even while claiming / acting as though they are after truth. It tends to reveal that the country is in very dire straits, controlled from the top by gangsters. They warn the media bosses not to put gasoline to conspiracy theories, and the SS is expected to warn media bosses not to imply a deliberate assassination attempt.

Word now is that the Secret Service will use this event to get more treasury money to buy more agents, due to lack of manpower to protect politicians. Every million dollars out of the treasury is an opportunity to fill private pockets, and this is also how the gangsters buy more gangsters under their authority. Gangsters at the top decide who to hire to be their underlings, and are not expected to hire angels. They get to know those who have proven to be good and reliable gangsters, and it is they who work up the ladder to the highest posts. Thank God for Jesus the Judge, Jailer and Executioner. Our hope is in Him.

The long and the short of SS guilt was to assign all responsibility of watch over the glass-factory roof to Pennsylvanian police, and to deny snipers and others overlooking the roof and the surrounding lawns direct radio communication with SS persons. Apparently, local ESU commanders allowed the snipers and policemen only phone and text messaging, with the requirement of messaging only the ESU command centers on the ground floor, not SS directly.

Needless to say, this looks deliberate because both the SS and ESU was complicit with the hoax. The SS purpose was to absolve itself of all responsibility for what looks like a planned and real assassination attempt. That now falls upon the ESU units, but nobody, so far as I've heard, has genuinely tasked the Beaver-county ESU to provide proof of its storyline, which itself (presented in my last update) excuses all players from responsibility by portraying the failure as merely a stroke or string of bad luck.

My prayers are the Trump becomes caught in his part of this crime upon the voters. Here's where the Republican congress wants to take things, like rowing up-river across a 50-foot-high, steel-and-concrete dam:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g21T0DHjVoU

Jeff Closed-Eyes

Youtube has no reason to bury the jeffostroff video below because Jeff is acceptably saying such things as no ladder to the roof present at the time of the shooting. I'm going to take issue again with this claim, because a hoax needs a ladder. All I need to do to win this argument is prove that this event was staged, which demands a ladder, and this is why I see Jeff as naive or worse:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQYqNLYQb5I

By the way, this video, at 9:02, shows that the gas generator above was not at the corner of the barn during the shooting. It may have been hidden away to the rear of the barn.

We see (the Stewart video above) several men going to the ladder at 6:12. It seems they were waiting to receive their cue to start moving into the alley to the ladder at 6:05, three minutes after this video has the first shot going off. They act oblivious to that ladder until they get their cue. If nobody removes that ladder in the short time that the Stewart video isn't recording the front of the building, then we can assume that there was tight management of the situation wherein EVERYONE present was privy to the hoax. Shortly after the shots rang out, two vehicles not seen in the Stewart video, a minute after the shots, arrive at the north end of the building complex, where vehicles are able to get in to see the goings-on, and in another video we see a couple of men stationed there whose job was probably not to allow any walkers through the buildings onto the parking lot who shouldn't be on the "set". Beyond these vehicles, we assume others were posted to block unwanted vehicles, in case one should come by. Making sense? Why else would the two vehicles (seen shortly after the 5-minute mark) park so far from the action?

The one who gives them their cue does not come from within the building, but from the front corner of the building. How did he know there was a ladder there? Why else would he direct them into the alley if there was no ladder there? See your problem, Jeff? The men at the neighboring building are three seconds to getting to the roof, when most of the men there are directed into the alley. What's with that, Jeff? Please do explain.

The one who gives the signal for climbing the ladder is seen standing at the corner of the building with two others, at 5:54. When the camera returns to the corner at 5:59, one of them has left while another in black hat and black pants has joined them. The one who left, beige shorts (or taupe), is now walking past the front door en route to giving the men the message, to the effect, "the ladder scene in the alley is now on."

You might say, "John, that sounds crazy." You might say that Greg Nicol (in green) told the men at the corner that he or his partner saw the shooter dead on the roof from out a window, and so Beige Shorts simply went to relay this message to the men, not suspicious at all. Yet Beige Shorts is himself suspicious because he came from the area of the tree commotion, where he should have known all his lonesome that the shooter was on that roof. And because he came from that area, on the opposite side of the building, he couldn't / shouldn't have known that the alley had a ladder. Who is this man that he should direct the men into the alley just as the men are three seconds to the roof by way of the skid? Instead of telling the men at the skid, "the coast is clear, shooter's dead," he directs them into an alley...with no ladder??? Of course not. Of course there was a ladder in there.

The man in black hat might possibly be the one on the roof seen in a Fox video. See my last update for "black head" to get details if you don't already know them. It appears that this man in black hat is coming from the spot at the fence manned by what looks like a state police officer (he's maybe seen en route to this fence at 8:16). The latter is leading the charge of SS units who arrive soon with the black ladder, who take charge of the roof scene to spew the propaganda that "proves" the shooter to be Thomas Crooks.

Why are the men at the skid not climbing the skid, but stalling? What is happening on the roof that might need some stalling? Is there some adjustment needed to the position of the dummy? Or the rifle? Roof access is easy out a second-story window. Greg Nicol's partner, or any ESU man on the second story, should have been the first one on the roof by simply removing the window screen. C'mon, folks, this isn't hard. In a genuine situation, an ESU man out the window should have come to the front of the roof to say, "he's dead, up here."

At about 5:00 minutes of Jeff's video, we hear of the report of blood in a washroom of the glass factory. The one who spilled the blood or fake blood on the roof may have been in that washroom washing his hands, or even flushing the red liquid down the toilet to get rid of the incriminating evidence, and then rinsing out the container to likewise get rid of the evidence. If he had been in the neighboring building when planting that red liquid on the roof, we'd expect him to do these things in the neighboring building, but as he was under the shooter's roof, it seems he originated, with the red liquid, from that building, then took the red liquid back down there. THIS ACT REQUIRES THE RED-WHITE LADDER. It may have used quick-dry fake blood, though the hot roof would have dried things fast.

Greg Nicol is the bald one in green top and green pants a few feet from the corner of the building. He's alone, begging where his Beaver partner is at this time. If we say he's still on the second story reporting what he sees on the roof, that's logical. In that case, officers on the first floor of the shooter's building should be coming outside to tell everyone that very thing.

There's about a dozen snipers and cops combined who showed up immediately, expected to have come out of headquarters, and as the shooter was directly above them on a low-slope roof, the shots, if indeed they came from the roof, would have been heard by all of them.

The SS men then set up the black ladder on the neighboring building, right beside the skid (acting as a ladder a few feet from the roof). Why not set it up in the alley, where some six-to-ten men were by that time? Why did the black ladder pass the alley seemingly oblivious to the men in there?

Jeff put out another video, below, showing that the bicycle is no longer to be viewed as Crooks'. I don't know where the original claim was from that it was his bike. Jeff shows a timeline indicating that local police called the Secret Service at 5:44 to tell that Crooks was using his range finder. Jeff thinks that the command center of local police was outside a red barn. I should say that, in the last update, I assumed that local command center was on the first floor of the two-story building. I had no hard evidence for this, but then Jeff offers no evidence for it being beside the barn. I assumed inside the building because there were police and snipers there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5QmV_xeB50

The claim above is that local police had a member in the command center of the SS, and that officer Lenz of the local police command center called, by phone, Sgt. Olayer in the SS center, at 5:44 pm concerning the range finder, and Olayer told this to the SS...suggesting that the SS has no excuse, now, to know nothing until the last minute. In everything that happens, I'm always asking whether it was part of the hoax, for a made-for-public reason, versus whether any event is genuine by someone not knowing of the hoax.

Perhaps convenient for the hoax, SS command center was at the far end of the field, behind the audience i.e. not near the stage. So, communications from the hot-spot, at the glass factory, had first to go to local command, then to the SS trailer, then to the stage. Convenient to the hoax, local police at the factory were not given a radio channel for direct communication to SS at the stage. In a potential assassination attempt, every second matters, yet police had to PHONE CALL the SS command, and what happens if someone on the receiving end of the call is already on the phone? How many seconds are lost?

Jeff is not the right person to explain these new-found communications, for he assumes a real assassination attempt, and he probably, like so many others, will not question whether these communications were fabricated after the shooting in attempts to satisfy all the holes in the storylines, or to explain away as-best-as-possible all police and SS failures. Anything that can be fabricated could be fabricated after the event.

The SS is in trouble because Lenz said, at 5:45, that state police and sheriffs were on their way to the rally at 5:45. This means that local police are either feigning that it considered Crooks a deep concern, or genuinely thought so just because he had a range finder. Does it make sense that state police should be called just for a thing like this when the area was already crawling with police and security guards, duh? There was nothing else suspicious by 5:45 aside from his Crooks "lurking," their word, not mine, and the range finder. And he was easy-as-pie to find on-site.

Local police: "State police, help, fast, send a dozen officers to the rally because we have this one skinny kid, a whopping 5-foot-6, who's evading us; we lost track, this place is too big for us, we need help finding him. Bring some big guns, help-help." Does that sound like reality to you? If not, why was a call to state police entered into the communications record? Was it because the head of state police was in on the hoax, and had a role to play after the shooting? A good theory is that state police were needed to keep the public from the bleachers and stage, where I say the evidence for the shooting is absent.

Meanwhile, though the situation was dire enough to call BOTH the state police and sheriffs, yet we are not hearing of any alert messages to ALL SS agents...because the SS game was to play ignorant of the shooter until the last 30 seconds, until it was too late.

The phrase, "outside of the fence,"at the video's 6:02 point, reveals that Lenz at central command was inside the fence, so the command center was not, apparently, in a building. But this only makes it worse for local command if they were near the stage, for they could just talk to the snipers on the roof personally (no phones needed) from the ground. They were only 25 feet up. What sense does it make to call state police miles away but not take three steps to the barn and holler, "tell [your boss] we have an alert, maybe stall Trump's stage entry for 15 minutes until we catch the suspect."

We then learn that it was Nicol who first spotted Crooks with his backpack, and Beaver has this at 6:06, five minutes before the shooting, more than enough time to take three steps and holler to the snipers: "tell [your boss] to get Trump off the stage until we catch the suspect and check his bag." In fact, if Lenz was truly at the corner of the northern red barn, he was some 20 strides from the SS guards back stage, no need to communicate with the SS snipers first.

In the 7th minute, we find that Nicol admitting to seeing Crooks walk to a spot between buildings, making it easy for Nicol to go out and find him there, if he tried. But to think that he didn't have a radio to both his commanders or to SS is already unbelievable, only in a hoax situation (when protecting high-level people) could this be true where the radio can spoil the hoax.

Jeff tries to cover for Nicol in the 8th minute, which is how to know not to trust this video producer on this matter. How would Nicol even know of the name of the Sheetz gas station, and why would he communicate a message that has him moving away from the stage unless the game is to cover for the hoax? That is, by giving a message that suspect is moving away from the stage, everyone told of it could think that he's not a threat, that he's leaving. The idea is to make him look like a threat in order to peg him as the shooter when in fact he shot nothing, but not to make him too much of a threat such there's deep blame for not contacting SS IMMEDIATELY. However, we now know that it was not necessary to contact SS, if indeed local-ESU central command was some 40 or 60 feet from stage guards.

The timeline even reports that cell towers were down, like when the cameras went blink at Epstein's jail cell just before he was "murdered." The deep state is turning this into a comedy.

Nicol worked for the Beaver-county ESU (Emergency Services Unit). That unit was the one that texted a message, way back at 4:26, sating that Crooks followed the car that the Beaver member was driving, and even parked beside him/her. Therefore, as soon as Crooks became suspicious, Beaver's responsibility was to keep watch on his car, or call police to be stationed near his car. Beaver left that damning text out of its timeline because there's no way to fix it.

What excuse does anyone offer as to why the car wasn't being watched? As he had no weapon when seen with the range finder, it's to be assumed in his car. But why would Beaver even say that Crooks was following into the parking lot BEFORE he became suspicious? Because, he was in cahoots with Beaver, part of the hoax, IT'S OBVIOUS. The text was to alert Nicol and company that the star of the show had arrived, escorted to the parking lot. The text was discovered by Chuck Grassley, and made public by him. Beaver did not give it willingly.

At 14:07, the timeline (not sure if this is the Beaver timeline) admits that, at the last minute before the shooting, a police officer "was hoisted up to the roof line by a colleague," a faked act that probably did not happen, but was for the purpose of "witnessing" the rifle, spotted here for the first time.

That roof line can be measured by the seven-foot size of the door on the building's west side, as 13 feet high. A man cannot hoist another man, on the first try especially, so that his hands are able to reach 13 feet high, and then he does a pull up holding smooth roof sheeting, high enough to get his head over the sheeting. If they wish for us to think that the police officer was standing on someone's shoulders, and then hoisting himself up too, I'm not biting. It's ridiculous. And that's why the deep-state cameramen don't have a video of this, because it didn't happen.

Jeff passed by that act like there's nothing to say against it, and so this Jeff character is a deep state's helper. He always respects the timeline as understandable. His job is to make you think the timeline is all good and reasonably able to explain the failureS to secure Trump.

Don't let anyone deceive you into thinking that the camera people under the tree were almost as high as the roof, in order to be able to capture Crooks on video 100 feet down the building. Nobody builds a building with the ground sloped toward the building because it's against building codes. The threshold of the building's outer door needs to be higher than surrounding ground, and there needs to be natural or arranged rainwater drainage away from the building. At 2:36 of the aerial video, where the camera shot is from under the tree (not on the day of the rally), one can see no land rise from building to tree. Roughly/almost the full seven feet of the door can be seen, assuring no sudden, steepish drop of land to the building. No part of the roof sheeting can be seen in this video.

The siding looks beige in this picture too, however, and white in other videos. See the other side of this retaining wall at 6:28 of the same video, where the same building looks white. Crooks was apparently sitting on this retaining wall when Nicol photographed him. Ask: why didn't Nicol video him? Is it true he only took a snap shot of him?

The conclusion, from seeing the wall from its other side at 6:28, is that the wall holds no more than two feet of soil on the viewer's side of the wall. That is, ground level behind this retaining wall is at the bottom of the wall, two feet or less from where we see it in this image. Even if the building is two feet below the ground under the tree, the camera would be level with the top of the door, roughly, maybe a foot above it, and so a line of sight from camera to roof line rises too steeply to be able to see a man laying down 90-100 feet down the roof. The shooter was pasted into the commotion video, for a camera cannot see him from under this tree.

At the 16th minute, Jeff argues that, if the red-and-white ladder had been to the roof before the shooting, the police would have used it to get to the roof, they wouldn't have needed to hoist a police officer on someone's shoulders. And he calls people "idiots" for not realizing that the ladder did not belong to Crooks. yet Jeff is as good as deep-state idiot box who thinks the police were definitely doing their best to catch Crooks. Jeff does not entertain that police were in cahoots with the shooter (probably not Crooks), and that police knew of the faked blood on the roof. This view changes everything, Jeff, and you are not the one to comment on this event because you do not entertain that theory.

Jeff neither gives the pros nor the cons on the theory that the shooting was faked. This theory is not to be tolerated, and youtube has probably buried almost all video owners entertaining that view, especially videos that have received many visitors.

Jeff faults conspiracy theorists for changing their stories as new (DIFFERENT) information comes out. Duh, uh, that's to be expected. Conspiracy theorists are after the truth, and need facts to arrive to it. Judging by the deep state's changing stories, we all need to guess again and again exactly what the truth is. It's not our fault that we don't know exactly the truth at the beginning of a story, when the deep state is stingy with its reporting. Jeff, go fly a kite.

The FBI claimed during congressional hearings that it possesses a video of Crooks ascending the roof, and of course it's not up the red-white ladder. One question is, did Crooks act out a scene in getting to the roof, but the bigger question is why the FBI has been so long in releasing the video, still not released as I write on August 7. The answer seems to be due to the FBI wanting options on how he climbed to the roof, and it doesn't yet know what its best option is. It wants to hold off on playing this card. Right Jeff? How would you know anything of truth, Jeff, if you respect the FBI for setting forth the "truth" of this story? I'll even buy you the kite.

You tell us, Jeff, why the FBI has for so long withheld the climb to the roof. In order to make police look good, the time line says that police were surrounding the building(s) before Crooks climbed the roof, and so how does he walk past them all, on low-sloped roofs??? He owns all the good luck, and police own all the bad luck and bungling. How does that not scream STAGED OPERATION?

In my last update, I was wrong to assume that there was a "front door" out to the parking lot on the north-west side of the second story building. There may be a back door there, and probably is, but I haven't seen it clearly. The text at 4:26 strongly suggests that Crooks parked a car in that parking lot, not the front parking lot. The text says that he parked about 50 yards from an "exit," which I at first assumed to be the entry from street to driveway. However, parts of the parking lot are 50 yards to the west side of the two-story building, where one could expect a back door.

Plus, nobody I've seen is mentioning the Butler ESU manning the eastern end of the second story. They too had a southern window to watch, and nobody, not even Beaver, mentions what they might have been doing as part of the last-minute failure. The Beaver storyline is that one of the three Beaver snipers in the second story had to go home early, and that the two others were on the ground floor when Crooks was sneaking past them on the roof. If Jeff and PP want to hold the theory that Crooks walked past the east-side window overlooking the roof, shouldn't they enter into their arguments that the east-side window should have been manned by Butler ESU? Repeated BadLuckBadLuckBadLuckBadLuckBadLuckBadLuck, but definitely not a staged event, says Jeff.

NoDroneRedFlag, but Jeff says there's no staged plot. The SS even turned down a drone from local police, but Jeff says NO CONSPIRACY. Private people own drones with cameras, but SS did not afford even one while also refusing to man the roof. Butler ESU could have stepped (no jump needed) onto a roof from the east-side window. Beaver knew that Crooks parked in the northwest parking lot, but Beaver did not put a man there to inspect and watch his car. It was all just repeated BadLuckBadLuckBadLuckBadLuckBadLuckBadLuck, says Jeff.

The 4:26 text could be indicating that Crooks needs to walk 50 yards, from the building, to get the rifle, when it's time to get the rifle. That is, in effect: "you know what to do, snipers, spot him out your east/north window, with his backpack, when he's returned from his car, and communicate that to central command so we have record of it for our made-for-public / made-for-congress storyline."

Jeff will need to shut his mouth once he sees the 31st minute of the Peak Prosperity video below, where three plain-clothed security guards / cops / insiders are captured in video at or near the commotion on the west side, the commotion wherein Crooks was supposedly spotted on the roof two or more minutes before the shooting. Although this spotting was a deep-state fake, both Jeff and the deep state need to live with the fakery if it causes insurmountable problems for them. And it does, because these same three insiders are at the front corner of the glass factory, shown in the Stewart video, and it includes Mr. Beige Shorts, whom PP calls, "capri pants guy." They could be grey / taupe shorts, I can't be sure on the color.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DccCDp1C9w

At 32:23, PP shows a retaining wall upon which Crooks was photographed by Greg Nicol. It didn't look to me like he was at a picnic table, but, with so much talk of one, I concluded, wrongly, in the last update, that this wall (seen from a top view) was the seat of a picnic table.

At 11:17 of PP's video, no major door can be seen into the two-story building, but a possible door at the corner of the building is showing. In a building that large, a exterior door is probably necessary to satisfy the building code at about that spot. It's probably a door. Nicol would have come out that door, if he came out at all, for he could see the stairs down to this door from where he was stationed.

In the 33rd minute, PP wants his audience to believe that, a man standing on the retaining wall could see Crooks. Not so. That wall is about two feet higher than the ground at the tree, yet is about 60 feet closer to the building than the tree, making the line of sight from a man on the wall to roof line rise much steeper. It's about 65 feet from retaining wall to roofline, and so a man's eyes, when standing on the wall, will be about eight feet off the ground, and if the roof line is just three feet higher, each rise of the line by one foot occurs over 65 / 3 = 22 feet toward the shooter. This means that, just 22 feet down the roof from the roof edge, the line of eye sight is already a foot off the roof. By the time it gets 90 feet down the roof to the blood stain, it'll be about four feet off the roof. Do your math, PP, it's not that hard.

How important is it if they faked a video like that? What do you think it means?

Talk of the police officer doing a pull-up to the roof begins at the end of the 33rd minute. "No witnesses," PP says. No video of the act, even though there is a claim of at least three cameras rolling toward the roof at the time. How important is it if they faked an event like that, with police fabricating the story? What do you think it means?

His name is not being released to the public, for no apparent reason to justify it. He's the hero of the story, where, amongst all the bad luck and bungled police work, a little good luck happened from him, and so due to his amazing pull-up and shoulder climb, SS snipers on the barn were able to kill the assassin in time to save bullets from entering SS guards on the stage. WOW, what a big deal, yet Mr. Butler Police Chief doesn't want this hero to be known. Not even to Butler's residents. The only reason is, they would either need to feign a name, or give credit to a real officer who then needs to lie to fellow officers when they asked him about it. Best to release no name, and tell insiders to hush up about it.

PP implies that the officer didn't radio SS about what he saw on the roof, but my memory is such that he did, but that his message was getting "stuck" such that it was delayed so that SS didn't get it in time to get Trump off the stage, but did get it in time to aim for the roof and get Crooks fast. In that context, officer Pull-Up is a hero along with his fellow, officer Shoulders.

SS chief Rowe claimed that SS didn't know of a gun of roof until the shots rang out, yet it's still possible he's not being truthful where the SS snipers did get Pull-Up's message before the shots.

In the 40th minute, "Greg Smith" lies to the people by saying he saw Crooks on the roof just before taking the shots. He claims to have been under that tree, or thereabouts. Again, trust your math, nobody could see Crooks lying down, taking shots, from that tree, nor even twice as far from the building from that tree.

Is it hard to explain why Mr. Smith would lie for being agreeable with the deep-state, then deny the existence of Mr. Push Up? I suggest the plan now is to thrown Push Up under the bus. But then the SS needs a new way to explain how its sniper was so prepared so fast to shoot Crooks. If Mr. Push Up didn't tell the SS that the shooter was on the roof, who did? We have not heard that anyone else saw the shooter on the roof, before the shots rang out, but Mr. Push Up. It seems far too late now to invent another witness of Crooks on the roof with gun.

Then again, someone may argue that the sniper didn't need to be told that Crooks was on the roof, because, once the shots rang out, the snipers just looked around for him, and, lucky-lucky, they spotted a little head on a roof, not even knowing that the shots came from the roof, but lucky-lucky, they just happened to see him, and the first shot the sniper took, lucky-lucky, was all that was needed. LUCKY-LUCKY. And who do you think you are to come up with a conspiracy theory? Don't you believe in luck or miracles?

The Butler sheriff is one of the boys who advanced officer Push Up as a real event. This event was supposed to be a big deal.

Jeff then comes out with another video revealing why Nicol mentioned that Crooks was headed toward the Sheetz gas station, for that practically assures that he climbed the HVAC unit shown early in that video, and this time, amazingly, we even see finger prints, according to the spotters that spotted them. How does Crooks put finger prints on the building that can be seen by a drone camera??? Are you kidding me? Was he doing an oil change at Sheetz, and, unable to wash his hands, got oil on the building? It seems as though the FBI is now ready to expose where Crooks ascended, with videos such as this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0y85dcP7SU

As you can see, Jeff went fishing for all sorts of articles talking about changes in rifle sounds, because he's stuck on a single-shooter scenario, exactly what the deep state could send him gifts for, such as youtube ramping up his views artificially so that he gets a lion's share of the storyline out to people watching social-media news. It would be easy for the FBI doctoring department to realize that the shots need to be less loud from the camera under the tree (= sideways angle to the Crooks rifle) as opposed to the Stewart camera facing the Crooks spot more directly.

From Trump's mic, the shots sound to me to be suppressed by a "silencer," but, as you can see, Jeff doesn't include the shots from Trump's mic in this video for a further comparison. Besides, the long and the short of this is that the FBI could have invented the gun shots from both sound tracks in this video, using a bullet-sound-making software. It's completely expected that the FBI has such a program(s), of the highest quality, that can alter sounds from anything.

You might ask, how can the FBI get away with a video-doctoring department? Ask the CIA, paid to be a deception machine because it has the task of spying. The FBI has the same task. They can argue that they need all the tricks at their disposal to catch the bad guys, and then the bad guys become predominantly the honest or Christian people of their own country, especially those now speaking out against their obvious corruption. The are infiltrators, and it's now obvious they infiltrated top levels of the Secret Service.

By having the same software alter shot sounds, two or more sets will be exactly in tune as per their timing. So, the FBI takes the shots from Trump's mic, then alters them; the plotters don't need to create new sets of shots that are manually timed as close as possible to the ones on the Trump mic. Instead, the shots come out with exactness in timing, only the sound qualities are different. And then the FBI stooges in video / news land all pile on with how camera and rifle angles change the sounds, which is true, yet the public generally got the impression that the first three shots from Trump's mic were not from the same gun as the last five, explaining why the FBI made the eight shots from under the tree sound like they were from the same gun.

I suggest that the three and five were from the same TYPE of gun, because the plot was to make Crooks own them all, yet I'm thinking, due to the flashes at the window, they were not from the same gun. In not being from the same gun, chances are that all mics picked the shots up from different angles, explaining the different sounds.

Jeff speaks as though conspiracy-theory guys naturally take on the idea of two guns, when the reality is that, amongst those who hear the sound differences at Trump's mic, they theorize a conspiracy by the deep state. Only the most-naive person still argues that the FBI and CIA are good guys; the knowledge has spread through the dough that these organizations are the biggest corruption problem the country has, but Jeff gladly sticks up for them. The time has come when the anti-conspiracy guys are looking like crazies. This is why I want someone large to prove that this event was a hoax, to puff and harden this spreading knowledge.

At the end of this video, Jeff says that the flashes from the window couldn't have been from a gun because the glass was not broken. This is the "height" of his honesty level, that he won't mention the possibility of removable glass pane, then re-installed from the inside after the shots. Or, possibly, the window was simply opened, with screen removed, and the Stewart video makes the open part of the window disappear with a little doctoring, easy to do if they own the video from the start.

PP needs to see that there is no glass glare on that window during the flashes. They both need to fesse-up that the flashes go beyond the glass to the window frame, making it impossible to explain as light reflection off the glass. Therefore, what were those flashes made from, if not from a gun? How did the plane penetrate the twin tower like butter if not from a doctoring software? How deceptive can doctored videos be these days?

The snipers on the second story, obviously part of the hoax, had rifles in their windows. At least one window was open from where the five shots could have come. Why doesn't Jeff entertain this view? Why won't he and PP acknowledge that a shot grazing the ear flap, such that the flap was wholly healed in under a week, be so unlikely as to commit them to a hoax theory? Because, that theory destroys their viewership from trump supporters to the point that they will no longer be popular on youtube. They will get buried by the too-low views that they get.

The video below has Ron Johnson of congress saying that local police is "cooperating." Sure, cooperating by giving information that could be as false as it could be true, depending on where it needs to insert the false:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJONjRqUuEQ

Faked Hoist-to-Roof Scene

Now, on August 8, the FBI thought is was safe to put out a faked video of the officer doing a pull-up to the roof. However, this video exposes an extravagant stage production going beyond the hoist-to-roof act. Not-too-careful analysis will show this to be a staged production. Start this video at 1:10:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sdFxsCiyh8

When we see his hands on the roof, how possibly could his chest camera point there? How did he get his chest above the roof line? Does anyone even ask? Or do they take this video for fact as presented? When the two men are nearest to one another, it's plain that there's no camera on a helmet.

To the side of the lower roof (we see) is the upper part of the factory wall with metal roof sheeting on top. I think police-cam footage is massacred by design to prevent the public from incriminating officers when certain scenes are capable, but police departments must have a way to get the footage in crisp and normal fashion, of course.

This officer, even if his head was above the roof line of the hallway, CANNOT see Crooks on the factory roof, if Crooks is laying down, and especially if he's at the peak. If he's not at the peak, and has come down near the lower roof where he's at, then it becomes harder to explain how he got his bullets shot some half-minute later. It's barely possible.

Now that Crooks has been seen, he has two choices: 1) give up and get a lesser sentence; 2) go ahead with the assassination and get a harsher punishment, or get killed. Does this seem real to you, or just another false-flag operation?

The camera at his chest cannot get a shot of the hallway roof while he's hanging with his hands? The only way is for him to be standing on something, and you have only two choices: standing on the police officer beneath him, or a ladder. Which do you think is more logical? Is the first option even possible? There's no sign of his doing the necessary pull-up to get his head above the roof line, but even if he did, the camera would be at his chest and pointed to the wall. By himself, he could not have brought his body high enough for the camera to shoot the rooftop; he needed help.

At 1:46, we see the shadow of the officer who climbed to the roof, with no helmet on his head. He needed help to get the chest camera above the roof line. Was he standing on the man's shoulders? How did he get that way after starting from a lift from his crossed hands? The roof is 11 feet tall, and so the crossed-hand method needed to lift him four feet so that his hands could grab the roof edge, and having accomplished this, the officer on the ground squatted down, got underneath the feet of the hanging man, with his shoulders, and stood up. How much higher would that act have gotten the camera, do you think? Would it have been high enough to get the camera about a foot above the roof, as we are shown it did?

Well, he's a six-foot man hanging there with his boots seven feet beneath the 11-foot roof, and four feet above the ground. The camera is four feet below the roof line. The officer on the ground is likewise a six-foot man whose shoulders are five feet off the ground, and so the higher man would have been lifted an extra foot when standing on shoulders, maybe a few inches more than one foot. Is that high enough to get a chest camera above the roof by even one inch? NOPE. The camera would yet be two feet below the roof.

Jeff has choices. Either entertain a ladder, or argue that the roof was only eight feet high. Or, the man on the ground was nine feet tall. Which will it be, Jeffo? Do you like misinforming your audience? Didn't you assess the situation before criticizing conspiracy theorists? This hoist scene begs a conspiracy fact, but Jeff remains willfully blind, like an investigator who failed to do the investigation, but believes what the crook told him was the truth. Shame.

When the man who was supposedly at the rooftop goes out of the alley to the parking lot, we see the horse (at 1:47) Why did the plotters go to these lengths to feign a policeman spotting the shooter with gun a half-minute before the shooting?

Earlier reports were such that this officer hurt himself so bad, on his fall from the roof, he couldn't get a radio message to SS in time. I'm sure the public didn't make that up out of thin air. It must have come from one of the two officers involved in the hoist scene, who else? Why did they lie? Did the SS need this lie to explain why they didn't save Trump's ear, and did the two officers agree to telling the lie? That doesn't make a lot of sense if the original plan was to publicly release this hoist-scene video.

As of writing here, I don't know whether this video was released willingly, or whether someone forced it out. Perhaps, after the SS shifted the blame to local police, the local-police chief decided to let the video out to show that his officer did the right thing with his radio message. Upon exiting the alley, the officer supposedly on the roof, whom we can call, Peeper, went to his shoulder radio, as he ran across the parking lot toward the lawn.

When he's going through the parking lot, he's seen in the Stewart video from 2:36, 26 seconds before the shooting takes place (in the Stewart video).

Finally, at 2:58, the audio comes on, seconds after Crooks supposedly fires his shots. Perhaps audio was turned off because the shots on the Stewart video are not the real shots. There are rumors circulating that police cameras often come without sound a minute or so after their body camera starts rolling, but this is nonsense. Imagine police not having cameras that start audio at the same time as starting visuals, like maybe we are 200 years ago, like maybe they don't mind sacrificing key evidence against a criminal. This audio was turned off until after the officer made his radio pitch, and they kept if off even after the infamous gun shots.

You now get a chance to watch police acting in a false-flag event as this officer looks like he's trying to win an acting award. He's even huffing and puffing when the audio first comes on.

I suggest that a by-product for faking this hoist scene is to do away with the likely reality that the red-white ladder was in the alley BEFORE the shooting. Suppose that an outsider happened to see the ladder in place before the shooting. The plotters may therefore have decided before the rally to provide "proof" that the ladder was not there until after the shooting.

At 5:31 of the video by Gray Hughes Investigates, the one I'm using for the roof officer's video, someone rudely calls for a ladder, and it's heard on the roof officer's camera. He demands, "someone give ME a ladder." Everyone's thinking, "get your own." This request could have the purpose of giving definite appearances that the ladder arrived after the hoist scene. However, rather than this being evidence that there was no ladder as yet, it's more proof that there was already a ladder because this video wants to negate it. The more we see emphasis on negating the ladder in what can be gleaned as a staged video segment, the more it's evidence there was a ladder (not all body-cam footage includes pre-planned, staged production).

When the guy says, "someone give me a ladder," the situation was such that men could EASILY climb to the roof by way of a skin pallet. So, Jeff, tell us why they didn't go to the roof at that time? Tell us why the men at the cabinet didn't first push the cabinet smack beside the lower roof. Instead, the cabinet was a foot or two from that roof, so illogical if they wanted men on the roof right away. The cabinet can be seen empty and therefore shaky i.e. easy to move over. Doesn't it suggest a staged video production?

Just before 5:05, Peeper has his hand over the camera so we can't see a sniper if he's being lifted to the cabinet. When his hand is removed at 5:05, the sniper is on the cabinet, but he's not trying to set the skid up so as to get on the roof. He's just standing, acting, like a man without vigor, like a man who's obeying orders not to climb to the roof. By 5:23, not one move signalling he's to climb up, but then Peeper blocks our view again with his hand in front of the camera. At 5:28, his wide-angle lens gets a shot of the cabinet and skid on a direct angle, to show the cabinet two feet from the roof, totally illogical. The sniper is still not in the act of climbing up (at 5:28), and nobody's thought to push the cabinet closer to the roof. I call FAKERY.

The video time of 5:31 is over three minutes after the shooting, and the Stewart camera is, by then, already capturing this very skid scene, yet no ladder comes out in the Stewart video. Where do you think the red-white ladder is at this time? Did someone go fetch it at the request for one?

At 5:23, seven seconds before, "someone give me a ladder," men are moving toward the alley, as per the 6:08 point of the Stewart video, suggesting the ladder is already there when the ladder is called for. Look at how many men go into the alley (Stewart), which they would not if there was no ladder there, and they know there's a ladder there, of course. They don't come out of the alley straight away because there's a ladder in there. It makes zero sense for the men to abandon the skid scene, for the alley scene, if there's no ladder in the alley. For, the skid is easily capable of getting men to the roof. See that?

The cabinet is six feet tall, and the skid adds another three feet. The top of the skid is therefore three feet from the higher rooftop, an easy climb straight up for an experienced and trained, fit sniper. But the sniper on the cabinet, and others all around, hardly look trained and fit. Nobody in a genuine situation pulls men from this skid scene to an alley having no cabinet, no skids, and no ladder. Are you kidding me? Put your head on straight, Jeff.

I've got to stress this. Imagine how non-reality it is to have a small army of men go into a 10-foot-wide alley with no way to the roof, all sitting ducks if a gunman or two from the roof started to shoot them. In a genuine situation, they would be conscious of that slim possibility, and their leader (responsible for fatal failures) would not permit their getting into that trap. In reality. But this is not reality. At this time, they are not supposed to know what happened on the roof. In a real situation, they would all scatter around the building to assure that one or more gunmen did not get away. But as they all crammed into the alley, it wasn't because there was no ladder there.

When Peeper's camera reaches the alley, NO LADDER. It's gone. Where did it go? It's magic.

I say there is a faked hoist of Peeper onto the roof a 7:43. Look at how easy and fast he does it, holding a rifle yet, and note all of the camera hocus-pocus during the hoist.

The soundtrack to this video doesn't strike me as real. The men are too boisterous, more like made-for-TV drama from downtown New York. Note how roof-cameraman takes his sweet time going into the alley, which we can see from 5:55. This guy is doing nothing all this time, and when he yells to the crew (6:02), he sounds familiar. He's telling them about the alley, how he was in there and saw the gunman, but he's taking his sweet time to arrive because, I assume, he knows there are things happening in there, like they need to get rid of some evidence against them before he goes in. Hmm, let's see, what could be in there that we are not supposed to see. Hmm.

He finally arrives to the alley at 6:35, and, moving toward it, two men are seen on the roof. At 6:36, we see a slight part of one man standing on the ground beneath the roof, and another slight part of another man above him and extended as far as the roof. How did he get up there? You need to play this at youtube's quarter speed. At 6:35, only the man standing on the ground is seen, and only his back. We can make out "POLICE" written on his back, and we also see his full head. NOBODY IS ON HIS SHOULDERS. Then, at the start of 6:36, we see something else coming into view, the other man above his head, which must be a man climbing the ladder.

What happens next? Peeper barges in, right? Nope, not at all. Instead, he takes backward steps, getting further away from the alley, but also to the right of it, as though something in the alley is toxic to him. At 6:41, he starts back toward the alley, and arrives right to the corner of the ally at 6:44. What happens next? he barges right in, right? Nope, not yet. Instead, he films some bird crap on the wall, and shows us the lovely hairs on his arm, all the way until 6:58, a whopping 14 seconds later, when he gets his green light to enter the alley. Why did he stand at the corner of the alley for 14 seconds, Jeff? All the action was in the alley, but he decided to give us bird crap and arm blockage. Jeff, when you get your head on straight, make sure it's plugged in too.

What happens next? At 6:59, he gives us a small-sample view on inside the alley, and, guess what, the men are in the act of hoisting a man to the roof. But of course, it's proof of no ladder. By 7:03, the hoisted man is part-way to the roof, but Peeper is teasing us, not yet going into the alley, but staying at the corner, totally unexpected unless he was told to wait, to stay there. So he then gives us the bird crap on the wall again. Why? Because, even with what looks like three guys hoisting one, they are having problems lifting him, and so the director must have said, "wait, go back to the bird crap."

I kid you not, he stays at the close-up of the bird crap for over 15 seconds, until 7:20, when he finally gets the cue to enter the alley, and SURPRISE, NO LADDER. The man they were hoisting is either still on the ground at this time, or he's on the roof. There are eight men in there, as per my count, and they all had trouble getting one guy to the roof, but then Peeper himself goes up like a soaring eagle, not credible.

Where do we think the ladder went prior to the multiple men trying to get the one guy to the roof? The ladder may have been gone by then, or may have been against the one wall that Peeper didn't let us see. In any case, after the long seconds to 7:20, the ladder was definitely gone. I don't think the Stewart video caught this time frame at 6:16 PM, in order to spot whether the ladder was removed from the alley, but it would have been easy to pull it up to the roof.

When his body camera is pointed at the wall outside of the alley, it's taking a shot on motionless. A movie trick could be to have a motionless scene used to splice video. So, for example, before the shooting, the plotters were unsure what was needed to implant into the video of the alley, should they change their minds. They wanted options. And so they got the roof-policeman to take a shot of the wall outside the alley so that if they need to change the alley scene, they splice it at the motionless-wall scene, and stick in whatever option they choose. You can see some camera hocus-pocus at the last second before Peeper enters the alley.

I now have the information to say that I made a mistake two updates ago when thinking that the BBC aerial was immediately after the shooting. I made that claim because there was no one on the roof. It seemed strange that they would leave the body unattended after they had already discovered it, and after their being up there, but apparently that's what they did, and the BBC revealed it perhaps inadvertently .

If you'd like to load it, by finding "BBC" on the webpage below, you can see that the two police vehicles in the parking lot at the roof-officer's alley-exit scene are there in the same place, and the motorbike is there at its same place, but there are other cars that are not in the roof-officer's camera, assuring that it's not immediately after the shooting. Plus, the sun is gone on the parking lot, suggesting that the sun is near dusk at this time. It looks like they were prepared to leave the body there all night, which is understandable if it was a dummy. It's not understandable otherwise. This video cannot be used to prove that the red-white ladder was there before the shooting, drats.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/trump-shot-at-rally.13550/page-2

We still have not been given a video of the red-white ladder coming out from one of the buildings, and brought into the alley. Should we expect one?

According the Scripps TV, the hoist-to-roof and other alley footage was obtained by a "public records request."

While the sniper is on the cabinet, our heroic Peeper is telling him and other there, "He's laying down proned out," such a stupid thing to say, which he says more than once to everyone there, stupid and unexpected because it's been a "long" time since he supposedly saw Crooks laying down, and Peeper can't know that he's still laying down minutes after the shooting. Therefore, it seems that the script really wants to emphasize that Peeper saw Crooks laying down, which is fine by me because it helps to expose the fakery. For all they are supposed to know, Crooks fled to another roof, waiting for them to come up so he can shoot them too. After all, he's on a crazy suicide mission.

While Peeper is doing a passionate acting job, the snipers are thinking, "oh brother, tone it down a little, wudja."

As a home builder, I can verify that there's no way for Peeper to see Crooks laying on the higher roof by merely peeping his head above the hallway roof. The slope of the higher roof is far-too shallow to allow Peeper a view of anything on that roof unless his head was about two feet above the hallway roof.

At 57 seconds of the Scripps video below, one can see a man on hallway roof without ladder in the picture, but then why didn't the news station show the hoist to the roof??? It would have made a great-for-TV scene. Could it be because there was no hoist to the roof? The ladder could be in the alley at this time, hidden to the right of the scene. Why are they withholding a third-man capture of the hoists?

The great thing about this scene at 57 seconds is that one sniper has a foot against the wall, perfect for measuring the height of the building to his right. When he measures 3 centimeters on my screen, as if standing straight up, the roof measures 6 centimeters directly above his foot. This makes this building 12 feet tall, and therefore the hallway roof looks to be 11 feet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne-ua8XZEB8

I saw a view that seemed to show the building on the left as a little higher than the building on the right, and this differential can be made out at the scene where Peeper's hands are on the roof (1:18). The higher the building on the left, the more that Peeper could not see a man laying on the roof. At 1:31, he calls a fellow officer a "dude." That's an insult to cops. Policemen don't call each other that.

At 1:36, the camera shot of the officer in blue shirt seems already above his head BEFORE they BEGIN to hoist Peeper. This is supposed to be the camera on Peeper's chest, but as he's not off the ground as yet, it seems they are using another camera held by another man on the ladder. Right? How else could the camera be above the officer's head prior to the hoist?

The sniper with helmet is the one doing the hoisting, but when his helmet is too high as yet for the hoist to begin, it seems the camera shot is already above Blue Shirt's head. I think we can prove this because there comes a point where the helmet and Blue Shirt's head are in a straight line with the camera view, and the head is looking lower than the helmet at this time. What I'm saying is that there's a STRAIGHT LINE from the camera on the chest, to the helmet, and consequently the shot is already in the downward direction. See that? He's already on the ladder before the hoist.

LOOK IT. At 1:35, the camera view goes across the sniper's chest, meaning all three men are standing on the ground. But by the start of 1:36, the camera is on its way up, now level with the sniper's neck, but nobody is hoisting anyone yet. By the middle of 1:36, the camera has climbed about as much as a man climbs to the first rung of the ladder, it's obvious if you play this at quarter speed. The camera appears to be at about the third rung by the end of 1:36. The sniper's act-job doesn't begin the hoist until the end of 1:36, and he's already a couple of feet off the ground at this time. The hoist starts at "three," just as 1:37 appears on the timer. FAKE.

Don't be deceived by the rifle/strap pasted into the scene, because this gets used to block what's truly happening at 1:39. Anyone with a head screwed on properly knows a man doesn't do a hoist job to an 11-foot roof with a rifle strapped to his body. For his roof-mount scene, the camera goes dark, thanks to the rifle/strap, so that we can't see it. Camera hocus-pocus follows, then the lights come back on when he's on the roof.

The reason I see a second camera is that, at 1:37, a hand comes into view that, at first, looks too far from the camera to belong to the a body-cam. It's probably Peeper's hand, but he's standing beside the camera and inserting his hand into the scene as part of the fakery. Police body-cams catching distorted pictures by nature are a priority in doing fake jobs, we can safely assume. When a knee comes into view at 1:38, along with the arm and sleeve, they both appear to be coming from the side of the camera, not from a man wearing a body-cam. The thigh is coming from the side of the picture.

I'm not sure exactly how this stunt was produced, but I see lots of pasting. Possibly, in addition, they have a camera on a pole extended down from a man on the roof, with Peeper climbing the ladder and inserting body parts in front of the camera. One thing I know, one sniper did not catapult Peeper onto the 11-foot roof with only his hands. Jeff would say, ya-but, there were guys behind Peeper to help out. Ya-but, they could push Peeper only so high. Upheld hands go up about seven feet only, and last I heard, arms and hands are not rocket launchers. In this act, Peeper lands on the roof sideways on his hip, by the looks of it. Are you kidding me? Do I look as stupid as Jeff?

At 1:42, we verify (with a crisp view) that it's about 14 inches from this low roof to the roof of the right-side building, and some 26 inches up from the low roof to the shooter's building on the left.

Nobody stages this camera footage if it was a real assassination attempt.

By the time he's on the roof, there are four other men, at least, up there, and so now we know why he was about a full minute showing us that beautiful close-up of the wall, at the corner of the alley. He had to wait for four men to climb the ladder, then hide the ladder, before he could make his entry into the alley, and we can assume that he was getting his cue to enter from someone nearby, or by something someone said in the alley.

At 1:45, as Peeper approaches the dummy, one sniper has his gun pointed at it, so fake. The director on set said, "point your rifle at him," add drama. Even at the roof scene, Peeper is repeating how he saw the shooter alive with gun, again stressing the importance, to the plotters, of having that scene feigned. Why? My only answer is, as before: they wanted to have reason to radio the SS team about a man with gun on the roof just in time to take him out before he could kill Trump's bodyguards.

Sure enough, we could say, Peeper on the roof sounds like he's complaining that all security is not on the same radio frequency. But how would he know, since he arrived only minutes before? Ahh, that's their excuse for his not contacting SS directly i.e. he didn't have the SS radio channel, nor the phone number.

The radio shortfall was the storyline from SS management too, saying that Peeper's radio message didn't go straight to SS so that Trump could be taken off-stage in time. It's an excuse, and here we see that the excuse was part of the script from before the shooting.

Peeper is in my Stewart video starting at 5:27 beside the green garbage bin, nearly where he belongs. It would have been more accurate if he was in the bin as part of the trash. He's still standing there into the 7th minute, pretending to guard against someone on the roof, yet he's standing with the yellow railing between himself and the roof, not the place to stand in case you need to shoot to the roof, but perfectly the place to stand if your job is to air the script by camera footage.

My Stewart video is very blurred when trying to identify who Peeper is, but at times I think I can see the "peacock"...an officer in my last update, the officer on this same Stewart video at 1:28. In fact, both men have a black wrist band on the left arm. Peacock is shown looking at the roof opposite the alley, and he then goes to the alley immediately after looking at the roof. He starts walking toward the alley at 1:39, 1 minute and 23 seconds before shots go off on this video (at 3:02). Look at how slow he strides, not looking concerned about a true shooter on the roof. He's gone out of view at 1:56, around the front corner of the building. The timing seems just right for Peacock to be the Peeper.

Peacock is on his radio at 1:13, which can be when he got his signal that it's time to start heading for the alley. He seems to have originated in the area of where the horse was at this time, roughly perfect for overhearing "he's on the roof." I don't think anyone spoke that phrase on-site, but he knew it would be added to the camera work under the tree.

His position here, near the tree with multiple cameras shooting the roof, makes him suspicious, yet he can use this setting for making the claim that he went to the alley to check out the roof, because he knew people under the tree were going to be faked as saying they could see a man on the roof. There's problems with this, however, because he's supposed to be brand new to this building, wherefore he has no idea that there's a way to the roof at the alley. He shouldn't even know that the alley exists, right Jeff?

Rather than going to where the people are claiming to see him on the roof, he goes the long way, around the building to the alley. Why? Because the hoist had to be faked, and there were too many people where they claimed to see Crooks. They couldn't fake a hoist scene where the cameras were pointing.

Back to Jeff, Oh No

By the end of this week, the audio of Peeper's video was released from the time that he was still in his car on arrival to the site, and this is all a tease, a choreographed tease, for we now find that he saw a "dude" running on the roof while still in his car. However, he's a fake because he then walks along the southern side of the building too close to it to see the peak. FAKE.

The Stewart camera is at the fence line, and he barely sees the peak. Peeper is 20-50 feet closer to the building when he comes by, and he's even walking, which can explain why they didn't let out the audio at first, because it makes no sense to be on a casual walk with someone on the roof so close to Trump's stage. Jeff doesn't bother mentioning this blatant problem. It's at that point when Peeper should have alerted the stage guards with gunfire if he had no means to radio or call them. FAKE. Staged production.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhjrC1wzJG4

The video has another officer seeing the full run of the shooter on multiple rooves, and we're supposed to believe his radio message didn't get to SS in time. ??? Note how many cameras all caught everything in the script, one at a time, but were released a little at a time over weeks, like a BIG TEASE.

Jeff removes the time stamp at 6:08:00, at the 6:58 point in his video, and as the man on roof is first seen at his 7:41 point, it's got to be at 6:08:43 pm. This is so problematic that I don't think the whole crew wanted to release this. There was plenty of time, almost three minutes to pow-time, but it's a good bet the plotters made up an excuse beforehand as to why the shooter was able to get the shots off.

This latter cop turns out to be the third man at the alley (caught on Peeper's camera, just standing on the sidewalk), and he arrives to it just as Hoister and Peeper are coming to it, so authentic, ya-ya-sure-sure. He even points into the alley, to assure he saw the man on the roof, very bad for the entire plot. It turns out that this third cop is not the one who provided the ladder into the alley, as I assumed. The only remaining explanation is that the ladder was either leaning against the tree where no camera was able to spot it, or on the roof where someone handed it down, which needs a someone else to enter the alley (to man the ladder).

Really, why did he walk away from the alley, so inexplicable, into the parking lot? So that his camera would become off-scene, I'm arguing, so that the ladder can't be seen. It's completely UNEXPECTED for him to walk away and not show what the men are doing in the alley. What does this third cop expect them to do? He has no idea what they'll do. He's EXPECTED to capture them on camera. HE WALKS AWAY. SEE THAT JEFF? He's expected to capture the no-ladder hoist, but, sorry, Jeff, no satisfaction for you; we never see a successful roof hoist on camera.

The third cop arrives (14th minute) to the alley on an angle perfectly for a long shot inside the alley between tree and wall, to show no ladder on the hallway wall. There always seems to be that one main goal, to prove no ladder in the alley. He captures Peeper running across the entire front of the building, whereas he was walking across the south lawn while in public view. See that? And lo, this third cop captures a fourth cop running into the alley, the one in blue shirt in the Stewart video, right behind Peeper.

The third cop goes to the north side of the stage, north of the cabinet-and-skid stage, probably so disallow any outsiders from coming on-scene. He pretends to be on guard with his gun.

Jeff is having the time of his life proving from Peeper's video that there was no ladder, and he's ridiculing conspiracy theorists with glee. But he's not assessing the situation properly. Peeper's roof scene shows that he cannot be hanging from the roof because his hand grip is up some six or eight inches around the corner of the roof/wall. The forearm cannot bend around the corner of the roof, and fingers cannot grip six or eight inches past the corner unless forearms are horizontal with the roof, exactly what the scene shows for his right arm. That horizontal-arm position can't happen if his body is hanging below the roof. But it can happen if his feet are on a ladder. Here's Jeff's video, with hoist scene at the start:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3JmDL9_xBg

A man cannot pull his shoulders above a roof line, with a wall in front of his body, especially with his hands so close together as we see them (elbows would get in the way). But, assuming he did get to a position with his body weight on his forearms, it's not possible or expected, in that position, to point his chest camera drastically to his left. If you do this video slowly, you see the camera point about a foot to the left of his right arm. ??? That's a drastic direction. What in tarnation doesn't Jeff understand about this fakery? The camera can point to the left if he's on a ladder, with no weight on his forearms.

Does anyone see signs of body weight on his forearm? Therefore, a third man brought the ladder behind Peeper when they were both entering the alley. The way Jeff thinks: there's no ladder seen in the alley, therefore no ladder was used. SIMPLETON.

I've climbed many building situations. It's impossible to get the chest above a roof line with hands merely gripping the corner of the roof. But Jeff will say that he had help. The officer on the ground (they chose a tall one, what else?) was lifting him, and so he was acting as Peeper's ladder, we could say. Let's look at this idea again, then.

The roof scene shows such that the camera is about a foot above his arms, wherefore the top of his head ought to be some 30 inches above the roof line. On the good side for Jeff and PP, a head 30 inches above the hallway roof could spot things on the shooter's roof. In fact, the roof scene was made properly for Peeper's eyes to see Crooks on the roof, no surprise. However, when we appeal to grade five math, that need puts his head some 13.5 feet above the ground, too high even if he was standing on the officer's shoulders. In the latter case, his head would be 11.5 feet high. Isn't that right, Jeff? How high is that off of the hallway roof, Jeff?

One man on another's shoulders is a whopping two feet short of the need. Peeper would be barley peeping over the roof line with his eyes.

If you look at the final part of his hands-on-roof scene, where the left hand touches the very corner of the roof/wall, there is zero strain on that hand for holding his body weight, which is expected if he's standing on something. But as he's not standing on shoulders, zikers, Jeff, what other option have we? Peeper, by the way, is a weakling, a pen pusher.

When we entertain his chest a foot above the roof line, his feet are falling about eight feet. During the fall, there's no evidence that he stood on someone's shoulders. His camera shot shows that he's positioned about midway between buildings, four or five feet from either building, but he falls to the ground next to a wall, not where we expect if he's four or five feet from that wall while at the roof. It is where we'd expect with a sideways jump off of a ladder placed midway between buildings.

Between the scene with hands on roof and his fall, the camera goes black enough that there could be a spice in the footage to remove a piece of the ladder that may have shown, as one officer pulls it away when he jumps. He didn't jump with feet seven or eight feet high, of course. He stepped down the ladder to about three feet up, then jumped. Right Jeff?

Jeff says it's only a foot, maybe a little more, from hallway roof to shooter's roof, and this plays to his position on the one hand, by requiring less height for Peeper to see Crooks, but only makes the hallway roof higher than 11 feet. Of course, he'll play down the 13-foot shooter's roof to 12 or less to make his position more reasonable.

Jeff owns a ruler, we can be sure, and so he can figure that the wall siding has ridges one-foot apart. When those ridges measure 2.2 centimeters on my computer screen, the distance from hallway roof to shooter's roof is 4.4 centimeters, or 24 inches (don't measure to the bottom edge of the roof sheet, but measure the wall only). However, this camera distorts the real picture in order to get a wider picture, and measurements may not be to scale with reality, from frame to frame.

What was the hoister officer doing in the alley all his lonesome, if this wasn't a staged operation? One could say that hoister was removing the ladder, maybe putting it behind the tree, but then I'd be risking Jeff's fury. What kind of an investigator doesn't ask: could there have been a ladder behind the tree? What is that third man doing outside of the alley? Nothing. But then, what will he do during the hoist scene? Get the ladder? Probably.

At 10 seconds of Jeff's video, Peeper pretends to have his right foot in hoister's stirrup (= crossed hands). If you're a guy that was once a boy, you probably know that putting your right foot into a stirrup for a lift requires your left leg to be straight under you. Then why do we see Peeper's left knee, with leg bent at the knee, as soon as his foot goes into the stirrup? Because his right leg is not in the stirrup, but straight on the ground, and he puts his knee up into camera view to feign like his body is on the way up.

After the knee appears, the camera points down to the corner of the stones for six seconds before we get any impression that Peeper starts to go up, which is suspicious. Was the ladder being put in place at this time? Sounds logical.

By slowing the video to quarter speed, you can stop it at the start of 16 seconds, just as an arm comes into view. It can't be Hoister's arm if he's hoisting with both hands. Later in the 16th second, you can see the elbow of the arm, and even the shirt sleeve, as if they come from the side of the camera, as though Peeper is standing beside the camera and inserting his arm to its front.

Instead of the camera rising toward the roof, the camera view only tilts upward in the 16th second, as the arms swings through the scene. The camera doesn't begin to rise until the 17th second, and it may be rising two ladder rungs at this time, like when one skips a rung when going up. We then get a bunch of salt and peeper into our eyes, camera hocus-pocus that goes with some splicing until, success, the audience sees the daylight above the roof line. We are apparently at his body camera at this time, suggesting he's climbed the ladder himself for the roof scene.

The following video was staged to show the build-up for the cabinet-and-skid method of climbing the roof, and it comes with typical, deep-state profanity, and even some hideous tattoos. This video brings us to the front of the buildings 1.5 minutes after the shooting, but it's missing some footage, in case it matters to you; check the timestamp of you delve into this. You can mute this if you don't want the toxic profanity, such a bad look on law enforcement, so unprofessional.

The first sniper who climbs the cabinet seems like a weakling who never saw hard exercise in his life, not expected of a real sniper. Why pay real snipers when you can rent crisis actors?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxR76yrJO-A

Let's call the owner of this camera, Tattoo. I believe that Peeper can be seen above the nearest police car at 1:06, at which time Hoister is coming to meet Tattoo at the shipping/receiving door. They both get busy trying to get more than one man to the roof via the cabinet-and-skid method. This goes on far too long for a genuine situation, as though they were told to fiddle and improvise until getting the green light to ascend to the roof. Hoister can be seen leaving the skid area for the alley, at 6:14 pm, with several others. On Peeper's camera, when Peeper is in the alley, at 6:16:38 pm, he says to Hoister, "you got me up once, get me up again." By that time, there were four men on the roof aside from Peeper. At 4:39 of Tattoo's video (6:16:54 pm, 16 seconds later), the men at the skid scene are told that there's four on the roof. At 4:45 to 4:50, Tattoo acknowledges, with all yahoo gone from his voice, "we got four on the roof?...alright, come back down." That is, he tells the snipers to get off the cabinet.

The cabinet-and-skid scene ends, and I think I can see the officer in black, with three chevrons on his shoulder patch, shake his head in disappointment. Certainly, Tattoo sounds disappointed. Why that, when they should be happy or inquisitive? Because, they were acting, and now it's all for naught with the change in plan, to use the hoist-in-alley method instead. Tattoo came on the scene with bluster and passion, a wild hotdog laced with hot mustard, and when he hears of four men on the roof, he doesn't ask what the situation is up there with the assassin(s), nor does Triple Chevron (seems like a loner), because they know what's on the roof, a hoax.

Neither of these two rotten souls go quickly over to the alley to find out what's up on the roof. Triple Chevron walks the other way, alone. It's a faked assassination, Jeff, get with it. Tattoo was vying to be a star of this show, when it was stolen from him. He was excited about getting guys to the roof, but, really, he could care less if it wasn't him doing it. He now get's to go home alone, with his snake-skin tattoos, and dream of the next opportunity to be a crisis-actor star.

Then, at 15:40, Tattoo enters "headquarters" in the glass factory, and we're told that ladders "are en route," what else? Jeff can really sing and dance at the sound of this. He thinks he's won against the conspiracy theorists, for, to him, this is proof-positive on top of proof-positive on top of proof-positive that there was no ladder, yet, in the alley.

Then, at 16:21, Tattoo leaves headquarters, and pokes his camera into the alley, and, guess what? No ladder. Why did he look into the alley now, just after talk of the ladders a-coming? So he could make Jeff's day, what else? At 16:36, Tattoo asks concerning the alley: "is this where they climbed, or this where the bad guy climbed?" The whole world wants to know if the bad guys used this alley with a ladder, but nobody responds that the shooter went up via this alley. Yet, the real bad guys are the dirty-hearted cops. Ask Sewer Mouth Tattoo about that.

At 17:45, Tattoo says suspiciously, "this dude in red, whether he witnessed it...", who might just be the Stewart cameraman, for he had a red shirt. Someone else responds, "he was with them." Tattoo relents, and says, "he was with them? Okay...okay." It could sound as though the Stewart cameraman was an insider. The dude in red was mentioned earlier in this video while Tattoo was on the south lawn, where the Stewart video was taken.

At 18:06, Hoister is seen walking to a police car with passenger door closed. He opens it about 18;12, takes nothing out, then closes it at 18:16. At 18:23, Tattoo goes into the glove box like he owns this same car, the same car even that Peeper took a gun from, when, we may suppose, he was feigning like it was his gun and his car. I'm not saying that Tattoo owns this car, or drives it for his job. He took out some special door-lock keys, I assume, by which police enter buildings when they don't have the proper keys, like your house or mine when we're not home. He and others stand for a long time outside the shipping/receiving door, waiting for permission to enter the building, I assume, and then tattoo shuts his camera off. Video over. I feel dirty. Tattoo should co-host the Bongino show.

Someone in the comment section: "So let me get this straight......... He [Peeper] gets an AR pointed at his face so immediately jumps down and runs into the open where Crooks could see him better???????" Why did they do that stunt? For one, it was in front of the Stewart camera, and it thus proved he used his radio to send the message about shooter with gun. He gets off the hook.

He can also say that he was coming out to shoot the shooter if he tried to shoot Trump, but this is lame because he should have shot three shots even before he was on the radio, to alert Trump's guards. Plus, the Stewart camera is barely able to see a head and rifle come over the peak, but, if you capture Peeper (best at quarter speed) at 3:00 (2 seconds before pow-time), you can see he's about 20 feet closer to the building, where he can't even see the peak. FAKE.

The blame goes to the SS for not providing Butler police with direct radio messaging to ALL, on-site SS people. Next time we do a faked assassination, says SS, we'll do better. We'll give local police full SS radio contact, and catch the shooter in less than 30 seconds before the shooting.

Aside from Jeff explaining why Peeper was not badly cut, as reported, here's another problem for him to solve, from another comment in a video's comment section: "I walk across these exact kinds of roofs all the time at work. They are super loud and get super hot. I have a hard time believing someone is laying down on that hot ass roof without a blanket or without having long pants and sleeves." The sky was blue, it was 6 pm with sun at a near-45-degree angle, way too hot for a skinny, not-hardened youth in shorts to lie on. Good point. But no problem for a dummy.

Crooks was right over the "headquarters" that Tattoo and the SS swat team walked into, which tells us who set up the hoax on the roof.

I may have made a mistake in the last update when suggesting that Peeper, whom I didn't yet know was Peeper, chased a woman away from the front door because he didn't want her to see what was going on. That may be partly the reason, but one can also assume he told her of a gunman on the roof, though, in that case, he should have made her go under the door roof. Instead, she ran into the open.

PP Does a Low-Down on the Peeper

In the first four minutes of a Peak Prosperity video out on August 9, he features a police-car video from the car that Peeper and Tattoo were in. The claim here is that this police car was not on-site, but called in at about 6:05 pm. One can see, in the 4th minute, that it parked in front of the front door of the building having the Crooks dummy. This car must have been part of the hoax, bringing some of the "props" needed for the stage show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJCY6Wnib_0

As there are two police cars in front of the building, spot that this car has the lawn directly beside it, at 4:06, meaning that this is not the car parking directly in front of the alley.

When the driver of the car gets out at 4:06, his thumb is showing on the door, and it looks like Peeper's thumb. It may not be, but it has similarity to it. I inspected his hands to see what kind of man this was, and saw a pen-pusher, not a lumberjack.

I've got a contention with PP where he tries to make the ground at the tree much higher than the ground at the west side of the building, at 7:02. PP, look at the shape of the bottom of the building; it's rounded i.e. police body cameras take distorted pictures for the sake of capturing more material. PP, you can't use this picture to talk about precise geography.

By the way, PP tries to mock the faked-assassination attempt by saying he's not buying that Trump deliberately turned his ear into the bullet at just the right time. PP, STUPID, there was no bullet. That's the definition of a faked assassination. Get with it. He's going to respond with something like, "but I saw the plane go into the tower on television." In this case, he's going to say, "but I saw the bullet deflect off the steel railing." No you didn't. "But I saw the bullet passing his head." No you didn't.

By the time I got to the 8th minute, I was delighted to see that PP is probably identifying the driver of the car as the peacock, yes, Peeper. He eventually verified that this is Peeper. PP shows him walking to the front corner of the building, where I said he was 80 feet from the alley. His camera timestamp a few feet before arriving to this corner reads 6:10:23 pm, I minute, 10 seconds before pow-time. I had him fully around the corner 1 minute, 6 seconds before pow-time, and so we are in good sync here.

I now see that he didn't go as far as the horse. In fact, I had him confused with another officer, in my version of the Stewart video. As it turns out, Peeper is the one pointing beyond Door 10 while talking, I think, toward Door 10, though there could be someone at the window; see 1:12 (Stewart video).

It's a good bet that we see Hoister and Peeper together at 1:53, where Hoister is walking toward the alley just as Peeper is about to turn the front corner. How would Hoister know to go to the alley at this time, unless it was pre-planned? Yes, when going back to PP's video, the man walking toward the alley is indeed Hoister, who RUNS into the alley, and a third man AWAITS standing outside the alley, like this was all pre-planned. Peeper himself runs at an average of nine mph because he covers 80 feet in six seconds (13 feet per second).

The most amazing part of this is that PP says NOTHING about what looks like an obvious staging. He doesn't mention that it's suspicious for Hoister to be running into the alley ahead of Peeper, and they seem to act as though they came upon one another by chance. Where did Hoister originate? Was he the driver in the other police car? PP has nothing to say thus far in the video. I'm giving this to you live, as I myself watch it.

As you can see in the 18th minute, the script writers are completely corny to have Peeper walk practically into the line of fire when the shots go off. It's like the script writers want pro-Trumpers on the edge of their seats.

PP shows much confusion, which I interpret as veiled skepticism, concerning Peepers action, but falls short of saying it was an act. Yet he 100-percent trusts that, because he didn't see a ladder in Peeper's camera shot, in the alley, the ladder could not have been up during the shooting. Do you see an example here of the shallowness that destroys America?

Do you see the uselessness of those who make money on youtube, who can't speak as they would like, for inability to lose money and youtube popularity? This is ruining America (and all other gangster-run nations) because it's allowing the bad guys to get away with virtually everything, though a little slower than would be the case if nobody was speaking out.

This is so simple. If PP could bring himself to confessing that this was a staged hoax, then, ABSOLUTELY, a ladder is needed to pull it off. IT'S SO SIMPLE.

PP can now reason:

Okay, just let me see. The cop [Peeper] drives over to the site, acts unnatural like he doesn't want to catch the shooter, but contributes to catching the shooter. But wait, hmm, if this was a true assassination where all cops are to turn a blind eye to the shooter, then they would NOT call this cop to the site, because they don't want to catch the shooter, or inhibit his shooting potential. Therefore, okay-okay, calm now, calm down, I think I'm getting this, uh, uh, something is brewing, stirring, what is it? It's, uhh......I get it, it's a hoax. IT'S AN EXPENSIVE HOAX FOLKS! The cop came as part of a deep script, why of course, slap myself silly in my face. John at tribwatch was right after all.

Way to go, PP, I knew you could do it.

PP makes a good point by asserting that Greg Nicol (man in green) could not have arrived to the corner of the building either down the parking lot or across the lawn. He therefore walked through one of the buildings. However, he was being paid by Beaver county (and who else?) to man the windows in the second story, and yet, two minutes after the shooting, he's outdoors instead of at his post, when there could yet be some danger from another shooter. Nicol knew that the dummy was dead, but, in a genuine situation, he would have gone back to his window post until Beaver command relieved him of that duty, and there's just no way it would be two minutes after a fatal shooting of an assassin less than 200 feet from his window. The reason he was outdoors so soon is because it was, um, a hoax.

At 5:03 of my Stewart video, there are Trump watchers too close to the building to be a genuine situation, some as close as 100 feet. My point here is that there are plenty of people past the tree from which the claim is being made that Crooks can be seen lying on the roof, a claim that the simple math says is impossible, which explains why we don't have a dozen images of the dead man online by now, expected because nine out of ten people own cell-phone cameras. Word would have spread like lightning under the tree, "hey, there's the dead man," and everyone would have gathered to the spot where he can be seen, beyond two trees, yet if you look at 5:03, people are evenly spread from tree to fence...because NOBODY could see the dead man.

PP hasn't done his math, and is simply trusting the videos that the deep state puts out. I've never heard him suggest that the deep state has doctored one of the videos / images. That's because he's poisoned his mind with the false notion that this was something other than a staged event. When we realize it was staged, we naturally ask: what sort of staging did they prepare in videos? How many people did they plant to take videos intended to be tampered with? DUH.

So far as I know, there's not one video out there making the popular channels showing the roof with Crooks not visible after the shooting. How can that be, unless all/most of the people on the lawn were crisis actors? What, the deep state can't afford 100 crisis actors who work only a stage extras, to do nothing but stand around and chat?

Shortly after 5:03, at 5:19, is the first we see of Nicol in the Stewart video, a mere blur (not expected unless this is a deep-state presentation), coming toward the camera from a little beyond the front door of the shooter's building, suggesting he came out from the shipping area of the neighboring building, because the back of that building has the two stories. He's outside shortly after two minutes from pow-time, meaning he either never went upstairs at all to his post, or left the upper floor about a minute after the shooting.

However, the Tattoo video first sees Nicol (1:20) coming toward his camera from beyond the tree at the alley, meaning that he definitely came out the front door of the shooter's building, meaning that, if he was upstairs at all, he didn't stay even a minute. He was inside "headquarters" in the shooter's building, yet when we first see him in Tattoo's video, he's not telling anyone, "hey, me / my partner saw him dead on this roof." Instead, he just stays to himself, and, instead of coming over to the cabinet-and-skid scene, he chats with other guards at the corner of the building...letting the acting roll on from both Peeper's and Tattoo's cameras.

That's right. In Tattoo's video, he stands looking at the cabinet-and-skid act until 6:13:47 pm, before turning around toward the corner of the building, not coming over to the commotion to tell them, "hey, me / partner saw him dead on this neighboring building." Instead, Peeper is the one chosen to relay this information to the actors at the skid stage, and Peeper happens to be part of the alley method of climbing to the roof. So, they wanted the option of using either method of getting to the roof, in case they couldn't use one...this is what it looks like to me.

It can also be gleaned that Nicol was an actor himself whose job was to tell a supervisor at the corner of the building, "hey, me / my partner say him dead on this roof." So the supervisor, I assume, the one in beige shorts, goes to the skid scene, and directs a whack of men there into the alley, leaving Tattoo and Triple Chevron almost alone with the skid scene. Tattoo was hoping he could tell all his friends, for years and years until he told his grandkids, "I was the lead part of getting the first gunmen to the roof." Now Peeper gets to have that "honor" along with a famous near-miss and famous catapult to the roof.

Jeff is beside himself as the Tattoo video shows the first-seen arrival of the red-white ladder, at and after 11:18 below. But he needs to get smart, because all of the camera emphasis on the alley is to trick us into thinking the red-white ladder wasn't there earlier. He would say that this, my claim, is a cheap shot, but I've explained my reasons, good reasons. The ladder is shown arriving to the alley a few seconds before 6:30 pm. No need to watch this whole video as it's mainly Tattoo's video; I suggest you go straight to 11:18:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM-1NKUK2WM

Jeff needs to get smart. All of the constant profanity on the police camera is not acceptable to police policy, but this is not real police work; it's a sham. Body-cam videos could end up in court, or at a municipal meeting, and so do you think that mayors and police chiefs want their police officers talking filthier than rat-infested sewers? Jeff's a dope. The ladder can be seen coming from headquarters way.

Likely, the men had pulled it up on the roof, then handed it down to a man or two on the ground, and my guess is that they put it through a door on the opposite side of the hallway, then pretended that it came out the front door for the first time, as we see it this video. There's an enclosed area between both hallways, and so we might expect a door into that enclosure from the opposite side of the hallway where all the hoisting was feigned. Right Jeff?

[Insert -- On August 13, I learned that the ladder was not coming out the front door (it looked that way, pardon me), but from around the south side of the building. Perhaps the ladder came out of Door 10 seen in the Stewart video. It's not necessary that this ladder was used for the hoist or roof-scene set-up, but it's to be expected until proven otherwise. End insert]

Look at how Tattoo isn't able to see the sidewalk near the front door shortly after 12 minutes, but at 12:13, he takes a couple of steps forward, then turns to get a straight-on view of the sidewalk just as the ladder is coming out the front door. SCRIPTED. There are two men looking his way at 11:11, either of which could have given him the cue to start pointing down the sidewalk. One of the two is the police officer walking straight toward Tattoo, but at 11:12 turns and faces the front door (with ladder about to exit), then immediately walks away from Tattoo, as if his mission, to give the cue, was accomplished.

If there is not a door on the opposite side of the hallway, then there needs to be one in the enclosure somewhere, which brings to mind the likelihood that the staging on the roof was done up the ladder from inside the enclosure. In this way, I'd be technically wrong to say that the ladder was originally in the alley. More likely, it was in the enclosure. I should have thought of that. Pardon me.

PP should now know as well as anyone that the plotters sent Peeper in as part of a stage act, because, like he says, Peeper found the shooter in a couple of minutes flat while all the other guards were pathetically floundering. This is why I hold PP to idiot-status for not mentioning the scene where Hoister races into the alley ahead of Peeper, with a third man outside the alley in charge of the ladder for feigning the Peeper's first atop-the-roof scene.

Did you note how on-the-slow side Peeper was walking while still on the lawn. Why was he acting calm at that point? Once he turns the corner, not only can we see his hands in his own camera like one running, and not only can we see Hoister running too, but he made the 80-foot trip across the building in six seconds at an average of 13 miles per hour, about twice as fast as a jogger.

Conducive with a staged assassination is the issue of Crooks' overseas bank accounts having enough money in them to look like pay-off dollars for various persons involved in the hoax. Fox did a story on this, suggesting credibility. Crooks' parents don't to talk to media, or anyone asking them questions, by the way. Paramount Tactical, no surprise, comes down on the side of the FBI as concerns these bank accounts. Plus, this video shows the not-gory face of the "dead man," easily faked. Besides, the face shown in this video, at 6:26, is neither the face of the shooter on the roof still alive with rifle, nor the one reportedly photographed by Nicol, but looks like a cross between the two. The face of the living man, who does look like the dead man, is that of Maxwell Yearick, in case you'd like to look him up. As always in a false-flag operation, confusion. The ear in this photo of the dead man is not the ear of the man alive with rifle on roof. The latter is in another photo where his ear is shown as being more normal, longer than the short one seen here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQGDsARqtw0

It starts to appear that the reported father of Crooks is an insiders in cahoots with Yearick. The webpage below suspiciously will not allow me to copy and paste into my page here, but claims that Yearick and Crooks practiced shooting at the same shooting range, and that Yearick's parents filed a missing person's report concerning him, the day after the shooting. Of course, the FBI and FBI-supporting media will discredit these reports, even is true, to the best of their abilities:

https://www.caclubindia.com/assets/maxwell-yearick-missing/

Look at Yearick's history, antifa leader in Seattle who of course is paid gangster money to do this. But why did google allow me to obtain the article above near the top of a search result? If it's so toxic to the FBI, why didn't google hide this article? Did google refuse due to the compelling evidence that Yearick was the man on the roof? Do I need to change my dummy theory for Yearick on the roof? Was he really dead, because the deep state wanted him so, or was he just posing dead?

Or, did Crooks refuse to have his face used for the dead man, and so the plotter's used Yearick's because he has some resemblance to Crooks? I'm convinced by the two side-by-side photos in the video above that the dead man's face is Yearick's. They both have the same shadow-mustache to boot. QUESTION: why doesn't Paramount Tactic mention the obvious bang-on similarity? He doesn't say the the dead man is a faked image, and I assume he's seen the face of the dead man on roof (I hadn't until watching this video).

I chose to see a dummy on the roof partly because it became obvious that Crooks wasn't on that roof. I did wonder how they would fake Crook's face on the dummy, and suggested that technology can ask a made-for-the-purpose machine to create a mask from merely a photograph. Put the mask on a dummy on the roof, and then take a video. But as this above is not the face of Crooks, the dummy idea starts to look weak. On the other hand, why would Yearick go onto that roof?

Paramount Tactical did a video on Yearick, and what do you suppose he will conclude about him, an FBI-toting line? In his first three minutes of apologetic chatter, he says there's no real evidence that Yearick's involved, yet you just saw Paramount present the side-by-side photos where there's no question that both show the same man. This video producer is a sham.

At 5:16, the two photos are presented beside a young Crooks, but the latter's eyes look brown while Yearick's look greenish / hazel. But Paramount leaves out the older photo of Crooks, the one supposedly took at the rally.

At 7:35, Paramount shares a video showing ear comparisons, totally unconvincing, between the dead man and someone the video claims is Yearick. My impression is that the video owner is a deep-state operative feigning to be anti-deep-state. His job is to "inadvertently" "expose" that the dead man is not Yearick, for anyone can see that the two ears are not the same, and therefore the two are not the same man. It's a trick. The man in the video might not be Yearick. American Intelligence has software that can pull up many similar faces amongst the millions of faces in its data banks. So, they can pull up someone who looks like Yearick, then have one of their "enemies" claim that the ears are the same when it's obvious they are not.

Plus, any photo can be changed these days, and Intelligence would have top-of-the-line photo-altering software. Therefore, when Paramount zooms (12:50) into that "very strange" ear feature shown on Crooks' BlackRock picture, a feature showing on the dead man too, we have a choice: 1) believe that the dead man, who looks EXACTLY like Yearick, is Crooks; 2) believe that the FBI altered the ear on one of the photos so that they both have that very-odd feature, even though the dead man looks not-much like Crooks. The best thing to alter is a very-odd feature if you're trying to assure that two pictures are of the same person. In this paragraph, "FBI" is a catch-all term for some aspect of the deep state.

Paramount, in all the videos I've watched from him, comes across like an FBI agent, or something similar, faking otherwise. I disagree with Paramount that the eyebrows on the dead man are "VERY" different from those of Yearick's. A study of the same face (I've done several) from different angles makes some facials features look different. It can be tricky. When Paramount argues that the two pictures are not the same man, he reveals to me that he's more a willing fraud than merely wrong.

Christian Videos

I think I'll often have a Christian video section just before the News section. I sometimes put one on while making dinner or something else in the kitchen. It's of much benefit to bask in Biblical teaching because most-everything else on media is defilement / erosion of the soul. We become like those we spend time with, and those we listen to. That's what it means when the Bible says that those who see Jesus, in the next life, will be like Him. I've come to like Alistair Begg. The more I hear how he holds to the Bible, the more I like him. His attitude is human, soft heart. Here's one of a few I heard from him this week:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqBUx6zlGuk

The video below soon gets to a short sermon that could help the struggling Christian:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzMId-VgdAM

Over the past ten days I've dehydrated a near-bushel of apples. They were a mix of old and crisp, but at a good price, and dehydrated food doesn't need to be top quality if it's eaten in the dehydrated form. Apples are excellent in the dehydrated form. However, to assure I don't eat Apeel, I peeled all the apples. I peel everything now. I don't care if I throw away a few minerals with the peel.

Food manufacturers are using Apeel to get far longer storage life, but farmers or distributors can spray it on the food without removing pesticides and herbicides first. We just never knows whether they took the time and cost to remove any toxins, even if they claim on the phone that they do. Once Apeel is on the food, it won't come off, and so you can't get the pesticides off either. Peel everything.

I'm not growing a garden this year due to too much work needed around the house. Over the past two years, I've learned that my soil has problems, especially a nematode problem, and so it alerts me to the need to store foods rather than depend on growing it.

NEWS

No news this week.