I remember one of the first things I heard was that a bullet struck the teleprompter and he was hit by broken glass. I never heard anything about it after that, so I assumed it was just false; but it made a whole lot of sense at the time.
wheres the teleprompter now? wouldn't that tell all?
Dead teleprompters tell no tales.
Hopefully it was taken into evidence immediately, but who knows.
The teleprompter thing seems to have been debunked but that doesn't mean it was a bullet either.
He wasn't really shot, I'm calling it
Some people speculated on this from day 1 when he wasn't posing for photos with his "bullet wound."
That's because it looks staged. He also has been on WrestleMania a few times and is aware of how to stir up a crowd like that. It's not that much of a stretch to say he had a good idea that the crowd would eat it up.
Nah, no need for a conspiracy theory. Also NYT photographer got a picture of a flying bullet.
he doesn't want to cooperate= confirmed shrapnel
The question was whether a bullet or shrapnel hit Trump. But of course, Trump does not comprehend nuance.
The question about whether it was a bullet or shrapnel wouldn't even be in the news if Trump didn't insist on playing up being an inch from death. Either answer would have been far less important than being shot at but no, he had to make the question about what hit him a big deal.
You’re not wrong, but the NYT played their part by taking a non-story and publishing it under an intentionally ambiguous headline for clicks. That’s probably got repeated to Trump as, “the FBI director is testifying to Congress that you didn’t get shot!” or something like that, which led to this outburst.
The NYT sure has been stirring the shit lately.
Trump does not comprehend nuance.
I'm dizzy trying to figure out if this is irony, sarcasm, redundant, humour, reality, serious, comical, factual, dystopian...or did the psilocybin just kick in, on so many levels?
Whoa, it wasn’t meant as some deep, philosophical statement. I just meant that Trump likely doesn’t comprehend Wray’s distinction between getting shot with a bullet and being struck by shrapnel.
Sorry, omitted the "/s".
It was more hyperbolic and melodramatic, though. "/h + /m".
/ps for psilocybin
/a for apropo
lol, sorry!
Either way, it shouldn't matter, someone still got close to killing him. But of course, Trump probably insists that people say he got hit by a bullet.
I'm sure we'll find out eventually unless he decides to continue wearing his maxi-pad.
Yes, to sane people, it is a distinction without much of a difference. But to his incredibly fragile machismo image, every inch is a mile.
This story could have just gone away, with most people never hearing that maybe he just has a little cut under his big gauze pad and anyone trying to bring it up looking extremely petty. But nope, Trump himself can't just let things pass unanswered.
Also worth noting: Wray's statements were made in response to questions asked by Jim Jordan.
This isn't something Democrats went looking to dig up. It got stirred up by one of Trump's frothiest allies.
Wait, Santorum isn't in congress though...
Trying to milk the pity party as long as he can to try and keep the spotlight off of Harris is all.
For anyone who was wondering why Trump refused to release the medical report after the shooting, this is why.
Trump definitely did not fuck a couch.
Fuck it? I’m more likely to believe that he raped it and then tried to pay it off using campaign funds.
Trump definitely did not fuck a couch.
Citation?
He didn't pay hush money to the couch.
Sofa King obvious.
'Big Sofa' is out to get him and Vance.
Their sexionals are on sale.
I have it on good authority that he also has not denied raping and murdering a young girl in the 1990s.
Ghislaine, that you?
When you are president, they just let you sit on them.
Even with a full diaper!
Of course not. He's not related to it or anything.
Fingers crossed! I have 'shrapnel' on my election bingo card! I just need "Black Hillary" (thanks for that one @nonailsleft@lemm.ee) and 'JD cries'.
The New York times did a video analysis that pretty convincingly showed it was a bullet. Why Trump is hiding evidence is just bizarre, like the idea of having to support anything he claims - even true things! - is offensive.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/26/us/politics/trump-shooter-bullet-trajectory-ear.html
It was a splinter wasn't it?
He got bone spurs in his ears.
Shootings. How do they work. Nobody knows.
Complete mystery, total head-scratcher. I’m pretty sure slow cookers are involved.
They followed up that it was likely a bullet or bullet fragment
It makes sense if it wasn't a bullet. I think most of the bullets went into the crowd so its likely he was never the real target.
Just because the person shooting at you missed doesn't mean you weren't in "real danger". Anyone on the business end of a firearm, wielded intentionally or neglegently, is in real danger. The firearm doesn't become harmless due to lack of skill or intent.
Yes, he was absolutely in danger. It might not have been as close of a call as Trump would like to brag about however if it was shrapnel of some sort
Maybe we should ask Putin?
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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