Trump's Ear wound

[Mendel]

I continue to be shocked at how prevalent this conspiracy theory has become — surely among the most absurd of the decade. It's yet more proof that there is just as much conspiracy ideation on the far left as there is on the far right. As the saying goes: "It doesn't matter whether you go around the left side of the goat or the right side; go too far and you end up at the asshole."

MTG has been pushing this recently, and we've been discussing it on https://www.metabunk.org/threads/trump-shot-at-rally.13550/post-367442 .
Not sure if she counts as "far left", or if your "just as much" is justified, but there are certainly some conspiracy theories and belief in the paranormal on the left as well.

 

[Dan Burt]

You might well be right.

I can't remember what my source was, but it might be outdated or inaccurate. It might have been Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Donald_Trump_in_Pennsylvania) which says

Aaron Zaliponi, a member of Butler County's Emergency Services Unit, fired the first shot four seconds after Crooks began shooting at Trump. The bullet is believed to have struck Crooks's rifle stock, causing it to fragment and send debris flying, which hit his face, neck, and right shoulder. The impact forced Crooks to stop shooting and reposition himself. Located on a building behind Trump's left shoulder, a team of Secret Service countersnipers were facing in a different direction and reoriented toward Crooks to aim the second shot at him before he could resume firing; a member of that team then fatally shot Crooks 16 seconds after Crooks had begun firing.

-but your reference is much more authoritative!


Right again, for most practical purposes.

The .223 cartridge was developed by Remington in the late 1950s. It was used in the original (military, not civilian spec.) prototype ArmaLite AR-15 rifles.

In July 1962, operational testing ended with a recommendation for the adoption of the ArmaLite AR-15 rifle chambered in .223 Remington. In September 1963, the .223 Remington cartridge was officially accepted and named "Cartridge, 5.56 mm ball, M193". The following year, the ArmaLite AR-15 was adopted by the United States Army as the M16 rifle, and it would later become the standard U.S. military rifle.

.223 Remington, Wikipedia.

The current NATO 5.56x45mm cartridge, designed by FN of Belgium and adopted by NATO (including the USA) in 1980, is the SS109 / M855. (Wikipedia, 5.56x45mm NATO). It is very similar but not identical to the .233" cartridge.
The "original" .223" cartridge continues to be made by a number of manufacturers, mainly for civilian use.

5.56mm NATO versus .223 Remington
The exterior dimensions of the 5.56mm NATO and .223 Remington cartridges are identical. While the cartridges are identical other than powder load, the chamber leade, i.e. the area where the rifling begins, is cut to a sharper angle on some .223 commercial chambers. Because of this, a cartridge loaded to generate 5.56mm pressures in a 5.56mm chamber may develop pressures that exceed SAAMI limits when fired from a short-leade .223 Remington chamber.

Wikipedia, 5.56x45mm NATO ; the "5.56mm NATO versus .223 Remington" section carries on for a while and I won't pretend to understand it all, but cut a long story short, the NATO round causes higher chamber pressure, so
(1) 5.56mm NATO-chambered weapons can fire .223 Remington cartridges safely
(2) Most (but not all) .223 Remington-chambered weapons can fire 5.56mm NATO cartridges safely
(3) If you use 5.56x45 NATO in a .233 Remington-chambered weapon not built to handle the pressure of the NATO round, you might be severely injured or worse.


Rarely have I spent so long on a post only to think, " I set myself up for that."
I'm not a gun guy, but somehow I'm not sure I feel any better...

On the serious side,

An examination of the ammunition collected by the FBI found .223 Remington caliber cartridges with a federal ammunition headstamp, 5.56 NATO cartridges with an Advance Armament Corporation ammunition headstamp, and .223 Remington caliber cartridges with a Hornady ammunition headstamp

...If Crooks was carrying mixed ammunition types, it suggests (to me) he was buying it "as and when" he came across it or could afford it; perhaps a "professional" assassin- or at least someone who had made a methodical plan, over some time, to attempt an assasination with a rifle- would use a preferred/ optimal type of ammunition.

At the gun range I have shot at, they don't allow .556 ammunition (Green tip M855 NATO) to be used but allow .223. Could be why he had both. Simply due to having the option of shooting at multiple ranges. The .556 is a steel core round and can cause damage to targets or ricochet that .223 doesn't.

 

[Ann K]

It's yet more proof that there is just as much conspiracy ideation on the far left as there is on the far right.

Sorry, I missed the part where you decided who is on the "left", who is on the "right", and how the term "just as much" is quantified.

Edit to add: I see @Mendel has just questioned you regarding the same.

 

[enilc]

On the day of the assassination attempt, he asked if he could borrow his father's AR-15-style rifle, saying he planned to go to a shooting range, sources said. Because Crooks' father had previously let him use the gun for target shooting, he was not suspicious that his son was planning anything of concern.

Crooks went to a local gun shop that day, where he bought 50 rounds of 5.56 mm ammo. He also stopped at a Home Depot to buy a 5-foot ladder, though it was not found at the scene and is not believed to have been used to access the roof.

https://abc7ny.com/post/what-thomas...ading-up-to-attempted-assassination/15067382/

This was pretty early reporting, but the only thing I could find about sourcing the ammunition. Seems inconsistent with the different brands, but could be that he was purchasing reloads or something from the "gun store." Or maybe he never managed to use that purchased ammunition.

 

[NoParty]

...It's yet more proof that there is just as much conspiracy ideation on the far left as there is on the far right."

To this point (4/24/26) the vast majority of the spreading of this particular conspiracy theory, that I have seem,
has been from the Right...so I don't see this as "proof" of the "both sides" trope.

To be clear, I don't think there's anything to Ear-gate, and spreading such nonsense should be condemned no matter
who is doing it. In this case though, I think this ct is a better proof that the Right is just way more into conspiracy theories,
than the left: They just can't help themselves: Even though this one degrades the image of a man that they've spent years
pushing on us, a fake assassination attempt is just too delicious to pass up.

That said, I'm enjoying watching the absurdity, and seeing Trump on the other end of a dopey conspiracy theory.

 

[Edward Current]

I continue to be shocked at how prevalent this conspiracy theory has become — surely among the most absurd of the decade. It's yet more proof that there is just as much conspiracy ideation on the far left as there is on the far right. As the saying goes: "It doesn't matter whether you go around the left side of the goat or the right side; go too far and you end up at the asshole."

What shocks me is how casually social-media users with hundreds of thousands of followers will throw this out like it's an assumed fact, an open secret. (Yeah, I am talking about liberal influencers on Twitter, a common example being "Mrs. Thelma Johnson.") And then I go down the replies looking for one reasonable person, and it's nothing but more of the same. No one mentioning that someone in the crowd was killed. No one asking for a coherent theory of what happened exactly. Nothing but "Staged hoax, everyone knows, ho hum."

 

[Mendel]

What shocks me is how casually social-media users with hundreds of thousands of followers will throw this out like it's an assumed fact, an open secret. (Yeah, I am talking about liberal influencers on Twitter, a common example being "Mrs. Thelma Johnson.") And then I go down the replies looking for one reasonable person, and it's nothing but more of the same. No one mentioning that someone in the crowd was killed. No one asking for a coherent theory of what happened exactly. Nothing but "Staged hoax, everyone knows, ho hum."

Yeah, but you know how Sandy Hook went down. The "paid actors" CT didn't make sense either, that didn't keep Alex Jones from pushing it.

 

[Edward Current]

Yeah, but you know how Sandy Hook went down. The "paid actors" CT didn't make sense either, didn't keep Alex Jones from pushing it.

I don't have any numbers, but Sandy Hook CT seemed much more fringe than Staged Assassination Attempt CT. That is why it's shocking to me — these aren't dedicated CT peddlers like Jones, and they aren't nobodies with 50 followers, they are very popular accounts who normally post extremely mainstream liberal takes. Then out of the blue they'll say something like, "This is the mentality that believes an ear can be blown off and grow back in a week." Sorry for paraphrasing. I can find some screenshots but I'm not sure that will demonstrate anything.

 

[FatPhil]

In this case though, I think this ct is a better proof that the Right is just way more into conspiracy theories, than the left:

Beware, it might not be the right-leaningness that's the cause, you'd need to control for intelligence. It might be that a medium-intelligence rightie is just as likely to fall for CTs as a medium-intelligence leftie (and likewise other strata along the intelligence axis).

Or, viewed from another angle: if you find a left-leaning CT-er, the surprising thing might be that he's left-leaning more than him being a CT-er, as the CT tendency might be accompanied by a whole bunch of other traits that you also wouldn't expect from someone who leans left.

 

[Mendel]

In this case though, I think this ct is a better proof that the Right is just way more into conspiracy theories,
than the left:

The best proof is data.

Beware, it might not be the right-leaningness that's the cause, you'd need to control for intelligence.

I found a study at https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9009899/ about vaccine hesirancy, which correlates nicely with conspiracy theory belief, that identifies both ideology and education as correlated with vaccine attitude, but unfortunately does not crosswise control for these factors.

 

[FatPhil]

The best proof is data.

I found a study at https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9009899/ about vaccine hesirancy, which correlates nicely with conspiracy theory belief, that identifies both ideology and education as correlated with vaccine attitude, but unfortunately does not crosswise control for these factors.

Yeah, data's always good. I've seen this cited a few times, and I'd like to dive in, because it is not US-centric (and I've alas seen plenty of CT thinking in Europe), but alas I can't find a copy of it:

Conspiracy Thinking in Europe and America: A Comparative Study

Annemarie S Walter https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0116-0631 and Hugo Drochon
Volume 70, Issue 2
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321720972616

Abstract
What explains conspiracy thinking in Europe and America? This is the first and largest comparative study of conspiracy thinking to date, presenting findings using a representative sample of 11,523 respondents in nine countries. First, it shows that the overall level of conspiracy thinking in Europe is equal to or slightly lower than the United States, contradicting the notion that conspiracy theories is an especially American phenomenon. Second, people more inclined to conspiracy thinking position themselves towards the right of the political spectrum, engage in magical thinking, feel distrust towards public officials and reject the political system. Finally, we find that – surprisingly – the country context in which respondents reside has hardly any effect as predictor of levels of conspiracy thinking or as a moderator of individual-level determinants. Heterogeneity in conspiratorial thinking seems to be largely a function of individual traits.

-- https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0032321720972616

 

[Todd Feinman]

Of course you know you could request it through your local public library, depending on where you are. Takes a bit of time.

 

[jdog]

I don't have any numbers, but Sandy Hook CT seemed much more fringe than Staged Assassination Attempt CT. That is why it's shocking to me — these aren't dedicated CT peddlers like Jones, and they aren't nobodies with 50 followers, they are very popular accounts who normally post extremely mainstream liberal takes. Then out of the blue they'll say something like, "This is the mentality that believes an ear can be blown off and grow back in a week." Sorry for paraphrasing. I can find some screenshots but I'm not sure that will demonstrate anything.

There's a spectrum there from contending the whole thing was staged (which is contradicted by the death of someone in the crowd) to contending that Trump wasn't actually nicked by a bullet (since the Trump cadre has a habit of making things up and not providing proof).

Some speakers use vague language that lets them later say, "I never said it was *all* a hoax."

 

[Mendel]

Is there any precedent for a sniper shooting at someone and planning to miss? at the behest of the target?

 

[Ann K]

Is there any precedent for a sniper shooting at someone and planning to miss? at the behest of the target?

Somehow your question reminds me of The Manchurian Candidate, where the sniper himself goes for a different target altogether from the one he was supposed to shoot.

 

[Mendel]

Somehow your question reminds me of The Manchurian Candidate, where the sniper himself goes for a different target altogether from the one he was supposed to shoot.

Yeah, but that's fiction.

It's like arguing aliens exist because we see them on Star Trek.

 

[Minus0]

Is there any precedent for a sniper shooting at someone and planning to miss? at the behest of the target?

Miss the target but hit 3 of his supporters, killing one.

If no one behind Trump had been injured/killed then a CT proponent could at least defend the hypothesis the rounds were blank and a tiny noise triggered explosive was stuck to Trump's ear. But the fact Crooks fired off 8 rounds clearly suggests otherwise.

What I find interesting about this conspiracy theory is Trump supporters assert it was the Deep state/FBI, while simultaneously Democrats assert it was staged by Trump. Very different theories of the case.

 

[boringrealit]

The best argument for it being staged as an assassination attempt (The shots against into the crowd was of course real) is that Trump never talks about the event. Normally he wouldn't been able to shut up about how Barack HUSSEIN Obama tried to have him killed or something like that. Besides that, everything about it is sus. For example, bodyguards don't let you up to pose for photos and chant "fightfightfight" if there was a real assassination attempt.

 

[Landru]

The best argument for it being staged as an assassination attempt (The shots against into the crowd was of course real) is that Trump never talks about the event. Normally he wouldn't been able to shut up about how Barack HUSSEIN Obama tried to have him killed or something like that. Besides that, everything about it is sus. For example, bodyguards don't let you up to pose for photos and chant "fightfightfight" if there was a real assassination attempt.

Really. Review the video again. Their clear desire was to remove him from the scene and cover him from further attacks. They did this quite well, but Trump fought through that to get his poster moment.

 

[Mendel]

Trump never talks about the event.

Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, February 06, 2025, which I looked up for another reason a short while ago.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-prayer-breakfast-39

Well, look at me. I'm standing before you today. I shouldn't be here. I shouldn't be here. A lot of people said I shouldn't have been here. A beautiful day in Pennsylvania. It's a shot that should not have been missed—missed. Well, it got me a little bit. [Laughter] It got me a little bit but pretty amazing.

My son, who's great shooter, Don—both of them, Eric—they said it's like sinking a 1-foot putt from where that shooter was with that particular weapon. And I just happened to turn at the right instant, a fraction of a second. If I was late or early, it would have been over, and you would have somebody else speaking today.

But I got very lucky. It was—a chart on immigration came down, and I looked to my right. Quickly, I looked to my right. I said, "Drop that chart." Boom. And I said, "Man, what was that?" So if I—if I didn't make that turn—so it's—

And you know, my son, Don, said, "Dad, I'll tell you, you got saved by God." This is—you know, I shouldn't say this, but that was a big statement for him to make. He was moved. Eric, likewise, because it's—you know, you could say it's a miracle, or you could say something, but it was really—it was God that saved me. Thank you.

So excuse me if I don't believe that claim. He did talk about it.

also, above I mentioned we have started to discuss this on the other thread (this one is supposed to be about the ear wound), and your claim was adressed there, too:

Allegation 1: Trump only talked about the assassination attempt once.

On July 18, 2024 during Trump's RNC speech he indeed said "you'll never hear it from me a second time". However, he returned to Butler, Pennsylvania, October 5, 2024 for a commemoration rally for the victim, Corey, who had been shot and killed. He also had another rally in Reading, Pennsylvania Oct 9, 2024 during which he talked about it. Subsequent to that, he has mentioned on numerous times that he took a bullet for the people. Most of this supposed to damning evidence is based on the assumption Trump would talk about it more since he complains about election fraud and other personal affronts going back decades.

If it was staged, then it was staged so that Trump could talk about it. The fact that he doesn't talk about it as much as he could may be because it was a frightening experience that reminds him of his mortality.

But generally speaking, the claim is argument from incredulity, the foundation of many conspiracy theories. "I can't believe he doesn't talk about it more!" Well, that's on you. Do you know how much other presidents talked about the assassination attempts on them? How did you determine how much Trump should talk about it? Or are you just going with the clickbait phrase "you won't believe X", where X turns out to be a perfectly normal thing once you click on it?

Look for evidence. Don't just go with incredulity.

 

[Ann K]

Trump never talks about the event.

He has used that photo of himself-as-hero on meme-coins, on "trading cards", and on twenty-foot banners hung on public buildings. He has even used that picture to replace Obama's portrait in the White House.

He has shown no hesitation in exploiting the event. But the wound itself appears to have been so miniscule that he did not have much to say about it, perhaps in embarrassment.

Donald Trump allegedly confessed to GOP colleagues that his ear injury was "not too bad" at the Republican National Convention, despite wearing his infamous oversized bandage. The then-presidential nominee told Byron Donalds that doctors had advised him to keep the bandage on, the Florida Congressman said, speaking at a GOP conference over the weekend. Trump arrived at the convention in July 2024 wearing the bandage, two days after surviving an attempted assassination while out campaigning in Butler, Pennsylvania, during which a bullet clipped his right ear.

Many convention goers decided to mimic the look in solidarity, also sporting bandages of their own. However, Donalds recalled, Trump himself was unenthused about his medical head accessory when the pair met shortly after his convention speech. "I see the bandage, and the second thing [Trump says] is 'what do you think of the bandage?'" Donalds said.

"I said, 'I don't like it. Take it off.' That's what I said. 'I don't like it. Take it off.' I said 'let everybody see the ear.'"

"He was like, 'you know, it's not too bad. It's not too bad'..."Doc Ronny [Jackson] says, I gotta wear the bandage."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...trump-gunshot-wound-ear-bandage-b2801239.html