On July 13, 2024, a shooting was attempted on the presidential candidate for this year's US election. He survived the attack.

Only millimeters missed a hit to the back of the head; the kinetic energy of the bullet would have killed him even before he hit the ground.

The current theory of a lone, crazed shooter is on shaky ground, as too many factors enabled the precise shot:

• The shooter was able to get an accurate layout of the area, buildings, and stage before the campaign event, finding a spot in the Secret Service's blind spot with a direct line of sight to the target.

• Only 135 meters from the target, on a building he climbed using a ladder, he was able to attack his target undisturbed.

• He fired up to 8 shots in rapid succession with a semi-automatic military weapon, which he was able to precisely adjust using a rangefinder.

• How could a sniper, without a direct view of the target, make a precise headshot?

These questions are up for discussion:

• Why was the shooter's location outside the secure area with controlled access points?

• Why was there no consistent response to reports from witnesses of a man with a rifle on a rooftop, ensuring the protection of the target?

• Why was there a blind spot in the Secret Service's coverage with a clear shot at the target?

• Why was there no effective perimeter security outside the cordoned-off spectator area?

• How was it possible for the targeted individual to stand up again, fully visible and vulnerable, instead of being quickly moved to a secure vehicle?

• What gave the authorities the confidence that there were no additional armed attackers inside or outside the secure zone?

• Who is responsible for the visible chaos caused by the small bodyguards, waving their sunglasses and pistols around?

I have a déjà vu to the assassination of J.F. Kennedy, who was shot from a moving car at a great distance by L.H. Oswald. It has been repeatedly concluded that even with his weapon, an old Italian bolt-action rifle, those shots were physically impossible. Oswald also died shortly after the attack, so he couldn't contribute to the investigation.

Let's focus on July 13, 2024.

An investigation requires both a hypothesis and a counter-hypothesis. Both should be thoroughly examined by separate teams.

The core question, besides the technical details, is the motive behind the act. Who would benefit from the sudden demise of D. Trump?

A simple headline for the answer: All those individuals and groups who fear a disadvantage from his presidency!

• Who among them had the means to organize an assassination?

• Who would be so disadvantaged by Trump's presidency that the risk of being caught for murder seemed less than that of his presidency?

Despite perfect investigative capabilities and maximum transparency, as portrayed in countless Hollywood films, there remain doubts about whether everything will be fully clarified.

Let's think about 9/11. At least with WTC 7, which was only damaged at an upper corner by airplane debris and yet collapsed straight down uniformly (reinforced concrete!), there has been no conclusive, physically plausible explanation provided to date.

Even though bookmakers place Trump's chances of winning the election at over 98%, I personally am not entirely sure if that will be the case.

His interest, and that of his supporters, lies in economic growth for the battered U.S. population, ending or exiting the Ukraine war to use the funds domestically, and protecting the U.S. from illegal mass immigration by enforcing existing laws. This directly opposes the interests of those who profit massively from the opposite scenario.

Anyone who hasn't heard the shot should be awakened by the nomination of J.D. Vance as his candidate for Vice President. Like Trump, he didn't emerge from the party machinery but from real life. He, therefore, has no obligations to the party or the economy. Additionally, at just under 40 years old, he is also a candidate for the future. Most notably, however, is his stance on the Ukraine issue:

• He doesn't see Putin as a despot aiming to conquer Europe.

• He views the Zelenskyy system as corrupt and as far from democracy as Afghanistan.

• He speaks openly about his views on the prelude to the Ukraine war and the economic involvement of the Biden family in Ukraine before the war.

At this point, it becomes clear that Trump and Vance need to be perfectly protected from crazed lone wolves in the future. It is likely that they are not relying solely on the heroes of the Secret Service, who are under the current president's control, but are also looking into private security sectors for meaningful support.

For a candidate to win an election, they must first be able to run.

To revitalize the U.S. economy and prevent a collapse, Trump must lower interest rates, thus cheapening credit. This increases the money supply and makes assets like gold and stocks more attractive. He can't break the cycle of low interest rates and rising inflation, but like those before him, he can buy some time.

As for Bitcoin, he remains the dealmaker. What he can't prevent, he uses. He demonstratively supports the decentralized currency and wants to move mining entirely to the U.S. Of course, he doesn't want to endanger the U.S. dollar. But you can control your enemy better the closer you have them, and eventually, even control them. The current jubilation of the crypto fans might take a hit if crypto is no longer anonymous and decentralized. The potential nomination of BlackRock CEO Larry Fink as U.S. Treasury Secretary would be a clear indication of an attempt to control global capital. That BlackRock litigated the first and largest crypto ETF against the financial establishment is no coincidence. The fact that technology pioneer Elon Musk is now an open supporter and donor of Trump also fits into Trump's belief in the superiority of private over state actors.

How much further the financial bubble can expand, whether and when it will burst or slowly deflate, is uncertain. Back in 2008, when the global financial crisis broke out, the end of the fiat system (credit money without asset backing) was predicted. That was 16 years ago.

At that time, an ounce of gold was traded at a third of today's price, and silver at 50%.

So those who started buying precious metals back then may not have made a profit, but they have escaped inflation and preserved their purchasing power.

Everything you need in terms of precious metals for your inflation protection can be found in our counters in Berlin and Vienna, as well as, of course, in our online store.