Dakota Beacon

The fix seems to be in now.  The way we can tell is that anyone who asks a normal kind of question is immediately labeled a “conspiracy theorist”, which is to say, some sort of lunatic.  And yet these questions are quite normal ones to ask, and, in fact, are constructive - that is, if the goal is to find the truth about the events of July 13.  

Of course there will always be the people who are so prone to doubt that they cannot even bring themselves to believe there really was a shooting.  The suggestion that Trump staged the whole thing as an elaborate publicity stunt just to boost his poll numbers is beyond absurd.  Why?  Well, because it flies in the face of all logic and reason.  The first reason you know this is silly is that in order to get away with it Trump would have had to be a consummate actor, he would have to have secured the total cooperation of the Secret Service and the media.  The Secret Service is currently under the direction of the Biden administration and the media has never been willing to even be fair with Trump, say nothing of cover up a story like this.  Some eager journalist would have had to sell his story to the Washington Post and write a book.  This would be too sensational to pass up.  Some members of the audience would have blabbed to the National Enquirer or other yellow tabloid for quick cash and a moment of fame.  They’d have to have Mission Impossible levels of special effects which would have stood out like a sore thumb in Butler, PA.  And would this have been intended as a snuff promotion?  Because a couple of people were seriously injured and one man killed.  All I can say to this theory is, apply Occam’s razor.

But this kind of thinking is often showcased just so as to cast general aspersion on all departures from the official narrative.  We need to assert that just because some people are so out of touch that they are willing to believe the weird theory above, that ipso facto, all theories other than the official story are also ridiculous, which is clearly not the case.

What are some of the more rational questions to be asked?  

Well, here’s one:  Why was the FBI up on that roof the same day with a fire hose, cleaning it off?  Was there any investigation before this was done?  Is it normal to use a fire hose to clean up a biohazard?  I don’t think so.  There are protocols for this which do not encompass the use of a fire hose.  Is it usual for the FBI personnel to be used to clean up a biohazard site?  So - go ahead.  What are some theories that would explain this strange and seemingly inappropriate act?  There are two obvious ones:  1) FBI personnel and county health officials have no idea that there are certain ways in which such clean-up is safely carried out and they just wanted everything to look nice and neat for the crime scene investigation; or 2) there was possibly some form of evidence to be found there which might not fit the official account.  The second theory raises some questions of its own - would the DNA have been wrong?  Fingerprints?  Something would have to not add up to fit the picture being put before the public by the authorities in this.  

Now there is a very reasonable question which might be tied to this and explain it - who was really up there on that roof?  It was perhaps too pat to just have that information immediately.  And why was the individual being sought here and there all over the rally site never found and put under police guard before Trump went on stage to become a target?  Was it desirable not to find him?  If we look at the photograph supposedly taken of the shooter on the roof, there are some striking dissimilarities between this shooter and photos of Thomas Matthew Crooks.  We also know little to nothing about this man, Crooks.  Were his social media and emails and texts scrubbed?  A little is being “found out” about Crooks but none of this seems to really give us a picture of the man.  He supposedly registered as a Republican so he could vote against Trump in a primary, but that’s not that strange.  Why regard this as so unusual?  It is legal and peaceful - it’s how we narrow down the choices for an election.  Democrats cross over when there is no contest in their ticket so as to help a less popular candidate beat a more popular one.  Trump himself has threatened his in-party opposition with “primarying” them (case in point, Chip Roy).  He was a “loner”.  Do you know any loners?  I know a few.  Do we all have to be social butterflies and joiners to escape the label “loner”, which has become a sort of pejorative?  Perhaps he was considered a “loner” because he held political views that differed from those of the majority of his classmates.  He was seen as a “staunch conservative” (which might fit with his parents' Trump yard signs).  Not all conservatives love Trump, but conservatives do not in general love chaos either.  I know a lot of conservatives and none of them is prone to assassination attempts.  

The guy in the rooftop photo has dark hair and considerable facial hair.  Crooks conspicuously does not.  How do they square this discrepancy?  So we do have a question as to who was on that roof, and whether there were other shooters in other locations as well..  We also have a question as to whether the person on the roof was actually shooting at Trump.  It turns out there were multiple sites which could have been used, at least one in a direct line from there to that rooftop to Trump on stage.  That one would be a gymnastics club building which is unoccupied on Saturdays in the summer.  There are windows available there as well as a rooftop of its own, and well out of the range of those planning security.  There was supposedly someone sighted on a water tower.  Analysis of the sound of the gunshots strongly suggests shots fired from several different locations which were picked up on the microphone.  Why is no one investigating this?  We are being told to just shut up and stop asking these questions.  We are “conspiracy theorists” if we persist in asking.  The government will tell us all we need to know - just as they did through the Warren Commission sixty years ago.  It worked so well then that it has become the standard modus operandus.

Here’s one.  Supposedly Crooks rode his bike to the Butler fairgrounds and left it by the manufacturing building where he - supposedly - took up his position on the rooftop.  Only problem with this is, what about the explosives - supposedly - found in his car?  What car?  Was he planning to blow up a car in his own driveway?  What was the plan?  Are we to believe that Crooks biked all the way to Butler with his backpack and his AR-15, parked it by this building and went up to shoot the president?  Did he actually take an AR-15 and leave it somewhere there unattended in advance?  And no one found it?  Which story is right?  Car?  Bike?  Bike with the AR-15?  No questions about that?  Either now or at the time?  Did he put the bike in his car and then take it out and park it to look like he biked?  Why?  It seems that the committee that put this story out there never even held a meeting.  

There was another story which needs to be verified and the truth told - that the people supposedly guarding Trump that day were not even Secret Service agents but various government employees.  Well, there needs to be some explanation.  That is as good as any.  Trump was not afforded adequate bodyguards and the advance planning for security was nothing short of disastrous.  People asked the Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, why the Secret Service had no one on the most obvious place - the top of that particular roof.  Her answer was unacceptable - because of its (almost flat) pitch it was deemed “too dangerous” to station anyone there.  This can be dismissed as a lie out of hand because counter snipers presumably from the Secret Service or other government stand-in agency were stationed on roofs at least as steep.  So she gets the buzzer on that one.  Even I’ve been on steeper roofs than that.  So, what other options were ignored?  Well, why not employ drones?  Nearly every county sheriff’s department has drones, even Grand Forks.  Someone else apparently did use a drone there but not for security purposes.  Mark Steyn said within five minutes of hearing this he had googled and found several companies in Butler, PA, which rent out scissors lifts that go from 20 - 50 feet high by the day at a rate of about $250/day.  Why not at least rent those for the day?  

The local law enforcement, according to one report, were given the duty of traffic control.  This seems a huge waste of valuable local knowledge which might have been put to use in devising a better plan for Trump’s security than simply depending upon out-of-towners who did not really know the lay of the land, obstacles, good vantage points, etc.  

So right here we have a couple of glaring questions - do you really know the shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks? And why are we supposed to “know” that he was a “lone gunman”?  Why did the FBI hose down that rooftop?  

Here’s another:  Who was the woman in the black baseball cap who sat behind Trump and took photos or video with her phone?  She was not in the least surprised by the event.  One report identified her as an FBI agent.  Let’s find out the truth there.  She just calmly kept it rolling while people were screaming and shots were whizzing about.  Very strange behavior to say the least.  

The questions continue to mount about the official story and maybe it’s time we stop being intimidated when we ask them.  The answers we are given do not add up very well.  And some of these have not been asked of the authorities.  Our media is willing to go along with all of this and not bother too much about details.  Unfortunately, this is no way to run a democratic country.  These questions do matter.  This is why they are not being answered.  No one in authority says, “we don’t know yet,” or “we need to look into this,” or even “good question.”  The person asking is just labeled a nutter and is shushed up.  If he won’t be shushed he will be arrested presumably.  We don’t dare ask questions in America in 2024, which is one reason a lot of us don’t recognize our country any longer.  

If you see something, ask the question.  If the answer doesn’t make any sense, don’t be intimidated.  You are right to ask.  Here’s one for a lot of thought:  why did Thomas Crooks have three foreign encrypted bank accounts?  He was 20 years old.  Was Thomas Crooks the man who was shot on that rooftop or was it another guy?  Did Crooks have the ability to grow an instant mustache and beard?  Did he have an elaborate disguise?  We never heard about any fake beard and mustache found up there.  And let’s hear more about the explosives he supposedly had with him and the detonator.  There is a lot to look at in this picture.  

The American people should hang on and keep asking these questions until we get answers that make sense and until all those whose negligence or corruption or participation made this horrific attempt to kill a political leader and president are justly dealt with.  The US is becoming a laughing stock with our banana republic-style political behavior of late.  It is not only destroying our own freedom but it is diminishing us even further internationally.  We are looking like a joke - not a good look for a world power.  Not a safe climate.

Most people who have any critical thinking skills are reaching the conclusion that this was an “inside job” - i.e., that the government set this up to eliminate Trump.  In other words, our government is not only covering up the truth, it is the perpetrator.  We’ve seen it before.  There might still be a few fringe lunatics and village idiots who believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK or that Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK.  Neither is true.  We should closely question every attempt to assassinate leaders (presidents or candidates) and not give benefit of doubt to our own government.  There was no security plan employed or even devised for this rally.  Other American lives were put at risk and one man died protecting his daughter - an immeasurable tragedy.  Is it in part to intimidate people so they don’t attend public events like this?  Is it to stifle even further free speech?  It was a terrible day, but of course it could have been far worse.  They could have succeeded in killing a presidential candidate and political leader.  And thank God the crowd kept its head and remained relatively calm and did not run.  A stampede at a Trump rally would have been disastrous as well.  Do we need to “stay out of crowds” now and wait for another pandemic to isolate us?  Is that part of the plan?  

Make no mistake (as Nixon used to say).  There was a plan, just not the plan that was supposed to be there - a plan to protect the lives of the president and rally attendees.  There was a plan.  Part of the plan is a cover-up.  Part of that is shutting down our questions or giving us lies for answers.  Perhaps it’s time to question the entire scheme of putting everything under the Department of “Homeland Security”.  Everyone involved in this needs to be held accountable - we must insist on that.  And on getting truthful answers to our valid questions.