Just the fact that Trump said he was hit by a bullet leads me to believe it's not true.
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
459 points (91.8% liked)
politics
19072 readers
4650 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Bake 'em away toys! Case closed!
What'd you say, chief?
Do what the kid says
I had people shit all over me for saying that his injuries were more consistent with the glass shards, saying I am a nutty as the conspiracy theorist people.
I was deployed, my buddies got shot and hit, that’s not what a bullet grazing wound looks like. Fracture mechanics is also a very messy simulation, and when you introduce that much kinetic energy into a rupture situation like glass the stuff flies everywhere.
And here we are.
FBI Director Christopher Wray revealed during a marathon testimony on Wednesday that investigators still do not know if former President Donald Trump was grazed by a bullet or a piece of shrapnel during his attempted assassination.
But making this distinction doesn’t guarantee clicks, so let’s keep the headline from being too clear about it.
I think the FBI is saying they know where each round ends up and it's not in a trajectory that could have injured Trump. But they can't just say that to the Republican Congressman asking the question.
It's a distinction without a difference. "Trump wasn't injured by a bullet, he was injured by shrapnel from the bullet" doesn't let the FBI or the SS off the hook for missing this kid before he started shooting.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Trump responded with a post on Truth Social while the hearing was still taking place, calling for Wray to resign—but not for anything he said about the assassination attempt. Instead, Trump lambasted the FBI director for claiming that he found his interactions with President Biden “uneventful and unremarkable.”
He’s such a batshit narcissist. And rapist. And a fraud. And a crook, a pathological liar, vain to the point of gruesome, and many other qualities that explain how he’s running the entire republiQan party.
load more comments
(3 replies)
The distinction here is hardly relevant.
It is relevant to history. You can either tell the Trump story that a bullet hit his ear, or you can say that he caught shrapnel.
The only way that would be relevant would be if there was a determination that the shooter was trying to do some kind of ad hoc false flag thing, as opposed to writing his own name into history. Everything we know at this point indicates that the latter is true, and the former is not.
Whether Trump's injury was the result of a fired projectile or a piece of shrapnel, the injury was caused by an assassination attempt.
Whether Trump’s injury was the result of a fired projectile or a piece of shrapnel, the injury was caused by an assassination attempt.
We all know what really happened.
A trick he learned back in his WWE guest star days.
(This is meant as a joke, please do not be upset. I mean no disrespect to WWE fans.)
You know, it's funny because the moment I saw the picture where you could see a little blood, I thought to myself "did anyone make sure he didn't have a ketchup packet in his pockets?"
And sure enough, I'm never original...
I thought I was the only one whose first thought was that W wasn't surprised on 9/11 when I saw the clip of him being informed. Turns out a LOT of people had that thought. 😂
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(14 replies)
The truth is still the truth, even if there is no material difference in the implications.
That's true.
It's also relevant because one of Trump's current campaign statements is that he "took a bullet for America" which may be another lie.
load more comments
(4 replies)
except if the shooter was just shooting into the crowd and hit like a railing or something then it wasn't an "assassination attempt" it was a mass shooting.
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(14 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
If it was shrapnel then it dispels the idea that if he'd turned his head just a few inches it would've been death.
And it makes the whole divine intervention thing seem less likely, but they are already reaching so hard anyways I'm sure they will just reach a bit further... it's a cult after all.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
The only interesting thing about it might be that it once again points out the hypocrisy of the right.
They mocked John Kerry as undeserving of his purple hearts, and wore fake bandaids because he was hit with shrapnel.
... it once again points out the hypocrisy of the right.
We could climb that pile into orbit.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I think what you're trying to say is that "either way he still survived an assassination attempt", which I agree with, but the details still matter.
It’s relevant to the folks who believe in divine intervention, isn’t it?
The folks who believe in divine intervention don't care about what actually happens in reality in any case, so no, it's not relevant to them, either.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
He was struck by...a smooth criminal.
A Secret service agent there said it was a piece of glass that sliced his ear which made a lot more sense with how it looks, and is in line with Trump's retelling of the story at the RNC, (he heard a buzz go by) but it doesn't really change anything from either side. Trump would have said Jesus personally blocked the bullet no matter what and getting hit by glass rather than a bullet doesn't make it much less traumatic of an event to imagine for those of us with empathy.
load more comments
(5 replies)
FBI Director Christopher Wray revealed during a marathon testimony on Wednesday that investigators still do not know if former President Donald Trump was grazed by a bullet or a piece of shrapnel during his attempted assassination.
There's no way a bullet "grazes" an ear and it's not obvious... He'd be legitimately missing cartilage, he was seen golfing days later without even a bandaid on it
I don't think at any point any source has said he was shot.
Just that he was shot at, and came up with a bleeding ear.
Not saying he cut it himself, just that it probably got scratched at some point.
Due to Trump's age and, well, just everything about him, he's most likely on blood thinners. Which would make even a tiny scratch bleed like a motherfucker. It makes you bleed fast and takes forever to clot. A normal nick that barely bleeds normally would look like a murder scene
Add in the adrenaline and it's really going to pump out.
The most logical explanation is (and always has been) a SS agent accidentally scratched his ear while he kept trying to stand up.
Beyond physical injury, Trump's description of the event -- along with Wray saying the FBI is unsure -- really makes me lean toward it not being a direct wound.
Trump said he heard bullets "whizzing" by. A supersonic bullet directly next to your ear isn't going to make a whizzing sound like on TV; there's going to be a loud, distinct crack from the sonic boom as it passes by.
I fully believe Trump would be leaning into that hard if that's what he'd heard. "It was like thunder next to my head. The loudest thunder. The greatest thunder you've ever heard. HUEG thunder." It's exactly the kind of thing he loves to play up.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
The take-away here seems to be not that Herr Furher is stealing valor, rather, that he was standing adjacent to it.
Best photo of the ear we have right now, far as I can find:
Expand for bloody ear photo
Expand for bloody ear photo
Bloody ear photo with lines drawn on it
Bloody ear photo with lines drawn on it
Photo of the same ear taken sometime on or before Jan 8 2019.
Armchair analysis: Maybe it sorta looks like some of the helix (both tubercle and crus sides) flesh is missing from a graze?
I don't know what I believe, but it doesn't matter. I just want the facts.
view more: next ›