That’s a shame. 😉
I am sure the Arizona AG will get right on this mystery. /s
2024 blowout brewing: Trump 45%-Biden 32%
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/washington-secrets/2024-blowout-brewing-trump-45-biden-32
hope he’s not planning on flying anywhere for thanksgiving.
That just looks like neglect. Look at the wear on the inside of the tire. The ball joint probably just had ferocious play in it for quite a while. Dirt on the contact surface shows there was a lot of play in it for a while...
In the image below, we're looking at the underside of a Cessna Grand Caravan's engine mount. At the center of the picture is where the nose gear attaches to the mount. The two diagonal holes (pointed at by orange arrows), one to either side of the large whole are where special non-shearing bolts affix the nose gear to the submount at the picture's center.
If a typical landing-related force (with that effect moving from lower left to upper right) were to shear more standard bolts that shear off, it would increase the potential danger and damage to both the occupants and airframe. For that reason, the manufacturer quite reasonably chose to place non-shearing bolts there. That is, they would would be resistant to shearing, having instead a capacity to stretch and bend before they give way completely. Consequently, the nose gear would bend and would likely continue to afford some rolling potential rather than snap off and become a complete, spark-generating drag at that location.
If a great force--consistent with a very hard, nose-low landing, for example--had been focused on the nose gear, one would certainly expect to find not cleanly sheared-off partial bolts remaining in the engine-side of the bolt wholes, but stretched and bent bolts, deformed yet still partly mated with the mount before they would ultimately have broken off. That is absent here entirely.
This points not to landing or subsequent plane-damaging forces having removed the nose gear, but to a mechanic's intervention to remove the nose gear in a somewhat normal fashion.
However, this by all reasonable interpretations, IMHO, is 180-degrees against the official NTSB narrative in its report. That report that attempted to explain how the procurer of Barry's birth certificate just happened to die in a plane crash--except that she didn't did, but simply retired into anonymity.
Who could alter evidence from an ostensible aircraft crash and sway an NTSB report to corruptly ignore the obvious truth?
Short answer: the then Preezy, Barry and his CIA Director, John O Brennan.
