Wray said it’s not clear yet whether it might have been shrapnel

  • neidu2@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    His insecurity-induced attack is pretty much confirmation that the bullet didn’t touch him

    • DogPeePoo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      3 months ago

      Easy enough for him to prove it— just take the maxi pad off and show the public.

      But now he has a bigger problem, eventually he has to make his lie match his purported ear damage.

    • fluxion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Wouldn’t be a big deal if he didn’t already have the whole storyline of Jesus personally coming down from the heavens to nudge poor ol’ Trump’s head out of the way so that we can witness the peace and prosperity of fascist rule under a convicted fraudster

    • charles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      3 months ago

      Some people speculated on this from day 1 when he wasn’t posing for photos with his “bullet wound.”

  • chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.

  • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The question was whether a bullet or shrapnel hit Trump. But of course, Trump does not comprehend nuance.

    • mad_asshatter@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      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?

    • snooggums@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

  • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.

    • commandar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

  • Today@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 months ago

    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’.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    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 in any real danger.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.