A limousine belong to Vladimir Putin burst into flames after a tremendous explosion was heard along a Moscow street close to the FSB headquarters on March 29
Also, I just want to add: they picked an easily manipulated, disposable kid, and told him to shoot near but not hit Trump? Is that the story you’re going with?
Or what, there was no bullet, the injured people in the crowd were actors, they killed that guy later, the photo of the bullet was manipulated, and they just made sure they got to the shooter first to replace the blanks with real rounds?
Your theory either relies on the hypercompetence of a disposable kid to not actually kill Trump, or you’re enlisting a lot of extra people who all have to be kept quiet now, forever, all for the sake of a single moment of manufactured drama.
Which one is it? Or is there a secret third option?
It bled, there are photos of it bleeding. We have all seen it.
A wound like that doesn’t need to leave a big scar. Sure, some doctor might have been lying about the “2cm wide wound” but that’s not surprising at all. We know they’re liars and there will be misinformation around the event, but that doesn’t mean the wound didn’t exist. Head wounds bleed a lot even if they’re very small.
You don’t have anything except a tendency to confirm your pre-existing beliefs.
The shooter was easily manipulated by and he was disposable.
How do you explain the ear injury, or rather lack of?
Also, I just want to add: they picked an easily manipulated, disposable kid, and told him to shoot near but not hit Trump? Is that the story you’re going with?
Or what, there was no bullet, the injured people in the crowd were actors, they killed that guy later, the photo of the bullet was manipulated, and they just made sure they got to the shooter first to replace the blanks with real rounds?
Your theory either relies on the hypercompetence of a disposable kid to not actually kill Trump, or you’re enlisting a lot of extra people who all have to be kept quiet now, forever, all for the sake of a single moment of manufactured drama.
Which one is it? Or is there a secret third option?
I would explain the lack of ear injury by saying that there was an ear injury.
No one has seen the so-called injury
It bled, there are photos of it bleeding. We have all seen it.
A wound like that doesn’t need to leave a big scar. Sure, some doctor might have been lying about the “2cm wide wound” but that’s not surprising at all. We know they’re liars and there will be misinformation around the event, but that doesn’t mean the wound didn’t exist. Head wounds bleed a lot even if they’re very small.
You don’t have anything except a tendency to confirm your pre-existing beliefs.