Trump shot at?

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.

Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

suzeeq

2024-07-14 00:04:10 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Ian J. Ball

2024-07-14 00:15:10 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

shawn

2024-07-14 00:34:22 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Nobody should be wanting anyone dead. In this case I think it would
depend upon the nationality of the shooter and the reason behind the
shooting. If it were some random person shooting at him because the
voices in his head said so I don't think there would the sort of
powder keg explosion you suggest. Now if it were some immigrant who
snuck in to the States that would be a different issue. It would be
even worse if turned out to be say one of the Venezuelan gang members
I've been hearing about showing up in NYC.

Ubiquitous

2024-07-14 00:39:52 UTC

Post by Ian J. Ball
Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

It's that irrational hatred of Trump clouding their judgement thing.

Post by shawn
Nobody should be wanting anyone dead. In this case I think it would
depend upon the nationality of the shooter and the reason behind the
shooting.

But-Monkey alert!

--
Let's go Brandon!

BTR1701

2024-07-14 01:28:20 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Or one of the hundreds of ISIS terrorists that Biden has allowed to waltz
into America by erasing the southern border.

moviePig

2024-07-14 03:03:52 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Or one of the hundreds of ISIS terrorists that Biden has allowed to waltz
into America by erasing the southern border.

Oh, regardless of who the shooter turns out to be, I'm sure we'll be
doing six degrees of separation to connect him to Hunter Biden.

Ubiquitous

2024-07-14 03:40:14 UTC

Post by moviePig
Oh, regardless of who the shooter turns out to be, I'm sure we'll be
doing six degrees of separation to connect him to Hunter Biden.

Nonsequitur noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

--
"I wouldnt have picked vice president Trump to be vice president"
-- Joe Biden

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:59:46 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Or one of the hundreds of ISIS terrorists that Biden has allowed to waltz
into America by erasing the southern border.

Oh, regardless of who the shooter turns out to be, I'm sure we'll be
doing six degrees of separation to connect him to Hunter Biden.

100%

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:47:38 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Or one of the hundreds of ISIS terrorists that Biden has allowed to waltz
into America by erasing the southern border.

You are one stupid fucking Oath Keeper.

The Horny Goat

2024-07-16 19:32:34 UTC

On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 20:34:22 -0400, shawn

Post by shawn
Nobody should be wanting anyone dead. In this case I think it would
depend upon the nationality of the shooter and the reason behind the
shooting. If it were some random person shooting at him because the
voices in his head said so I don't think there would the sort of
powder keg explosion you suggest. Now if it were some immigrant who
snuck in to the States that would be a different issue. It would be
even worse if turned out to be say one of the Venezuelan gang members
I've been hearing about showing up in NYC.

This is why I e-mailed the president of my alma mater yesterday
demanding the dismissal of a professor who spoke badly of the assassin
for not aiming better.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ubc-prof-karen-pinder-1.7264576

She's entitled to her permission but she's NOT entitled to share it -
particularly when the opinion reflects badly not only on current
students but all alumni.

moviePig

2024-07-16 19:50:54 UTC

Post by The Horny Goat
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 20:34:22 -0400, shawn

This is why I e-mailed the president of my alma mater yesterday
demanding the dismissal of a professor who spoke badly of the assassin
for not aiming better.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ubc-prof-karen-pinder-1.7264576
She's entitled to her permission but she's NOT entitled to share it -
particularly when the opinion reflects badly not only on current
students but all alumni.

The article quotes two people. The first is attempting a sex joke
(which there's always time for). The second is mere polar bitterness.

Rhino

2024-07-14 01:13:25 UTC

On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:15:10 -0700

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like
they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into
real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

I just saw the CNN (print) report on this. Everyone and his dog in the
Democratic camp, including Biden, Harris, Clinton and several others
were VERY quick to declare their relief at Trump's survival and insist
that they were praying for his quick recovery. Considering how they've
been referring to him like an anti-Christ for years now and declaring
that his re-election would mean the end of Democracy, it's hard to
believe they're sincere. A slightly more accurate shooter would have
solved a LOT of Democratic problems very quickly, assuming that it
didn't cause an actual Civil War.

--
Rhino

BTR1701

2024-07-14 01:30:28 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:15:10 -0700

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like
they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into
real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Not everyone. Just moments after someone tried to murder Trump, a CNN
analyst said the following:

"Donald Trump and the people around him perceive themselves to be under
threat... and that is not legitimate."

I'm not sure it's possible to hate these people enough.

Post by Rhino
Considering how they've
been referring to him like an anti-Christ for years now and declaring
that his re-election would mean the end of Democracy, it's hard to
believe they're sincere. A slightly more accurate shooter would have
solved a LOT of Democratic problems very quickly, assuming that it
didn't cause an actual Civil War.

Rhino

2024-07-14 02:09:59 UTC

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 01:30:28 +0000

Post by Rhino
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:15:10 -0700

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like
they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into
real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump
been assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me,
you don't want that.

Not everyone. Just moments after someone tried to murder Trump, a CNN
"Donald Trump and the people around him perceive themselves to be
under threat... and that is not legitimate."
I'm not sure it's possible to hate these people enough.

Post by Rhino
Considering how they've
been referring to him like an anti-Christ for years now and
declaring that his re-election would mean the end of Democracy,
it's hard to believe they're sincere. A slightly more accurate
shooter would have solved a LOT of Democratic problems very
quickly, assuming that it didn't cause an actual Civil War.

I'm fully expecting the MSM to craft a narrative to the effect that, as
much as they're appalled, utterly shocked, at the idea of anyone using
violence in a political contest, that it's really not that shocking
that somebody decided to take a shot at Trump given the obvious damage
that everyone KNOWS he will inflict if he's re-elected. The anchors
will try to look as serious and sincere as they can but I'm expecting at
least some to break a little and let a little grin sneak across their
faces. The late night pundits won't even try to pretend to be sad;
they'll just make it clear that they're disappointed that the shooter
wasn't more accurate and that the Secret Service did their jobs so
quickly. The crassest of them will offer financial assistance to any
other people thinking of taking a shot at Trump for shooting lessons
but them swear it was all just a joke when called on it.

--
Rhino

BTR1701

2024-07-14 02:21:40 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 01:30:28 +0000

Post by Rhino
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:15:10 -0700

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like
they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into
real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump
been assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me,
you don't want that.

Post by Rhino
Considering how they've
been referring to him like an anti-Christ for years now and
declaring that his re-election would mean the end of Democracy,
it's hard to believe they're sincere. A slightly more accurate
shooter would have solved a LOT of Democratic problems very
quickly, assuming that it didn't cause an actual Civil War.

Well, some 'journalists' are already lamenting the shooter's poor aim.

But the media isn't biased. Just ask them, they'll tell you so.

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:54:51 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 01:30:28 +0000

Post by Rhino
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:15:10 -0700

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like
they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into
real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump
been assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me,
you don't want that.

Post by Rhino
Considering how they've
been referring to him like an anti-Christ for years now and
declaring that his re-election would mean the end of Democracy,
it's hard to believe they're sincere. A slightly more accurate
shooter would have solved a LOT of Democratic problems very
quickly, assuming that it didn't cause an actual Civil War.

Well, some 'journalists' are already lamenting the shooter's poor aim.

You're sounding dumber than dog shit again: can you please explain what
you think it is about the fat orange fuck that garners even an iota of
sympathy? Be as specific as possible please.

Post by BTR1701
But the media isn't biased. Just ask them, they'll tell you so.

Right wing assholes have their own media--it sucks beyond belief which
is why you're complaining, amirite?

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:50:22 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:15:10 -0700

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like
they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into
real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Not everyone. Just moments after someone tried to murder Trump, a CNN
"Donald Trump and the people around him perceive themselves to be under
threat... and that is not legitimate."
I'm not sure it's possible to hate these people enough.

Sure, a Viktor Orban and Vlad Putin loving guy like Trump couldn't
possibly had this set up for him. The stolen classified documents prove it.

"Dumber than dog shit" are the only words that suffice here.

Ubiquitous

2024-07-14 02:21:01 UTC

Post by Rhino

Post by Ian J. Ball
Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

Did DoJ-certified imbecile Resident Joke Biden make the same
inappropriate ghoulish grin when asked about putting his political
enemies in jail?

--
Let's go Brandon!

super70s

2024-07-14 05:17:59 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 17:15:10 -0700

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like
they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into
real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been>
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't>
want that.

If they'd made no statements at all you'd be in here bitching about how
insensitive and crude they are.

Post by Rhino
A slightly more accurate shooter would have
solved a LOT of Democratic problems very quickly, assuming that it
didn't cause an actual Civil War.

He'd be honored as a hero like Travis Bickle at the end of Taxi Driver
who wound up taking decisive action for the benefit of the greater
society. And rightly so, America doesn't want or need to be trapped in
its own version of The Handmaid's Tale.

BTR1701

2024-07-14 05:35:24 UTC

Post by Rhino
A slightly more accurate shooter would have
solved a LOT of Democratic problems very quickly, assuming that it
didn't cause an actual Civil War.

You people really need to watch another movie. Any other movie.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-07-14 06:50:43 UTC

Post by Rhino
A slightly more accurate shooter would have
solved a LOT of Democratic problems very quickly, assuming that it
didn't cause an actual Civil War.

You people really need to watch another movie. Any other movie.

super70s got the wrong movie analogy anyway.

It never made any sense to me that anyone with any familiarity with guns
and rifles could have thought that Jimmy Stewart had shot Lee Marvin,
but "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."

moviePig

2024-07-14 20:30:08 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

Dems have an incredible blindspot about all of this - Had Trump been
assassinated, it would have set off a powder keg. Trust me, you don't
want that.

From Reddit:

“A weak person, very weak and small person, took a shot at me at my
campaign rally. It was beautiful rally, you people saw it. They used a
very powerful rifle, experts say it was the most powerful rifle they had
seen. The bullet bounced off my skull. The doctors did an X-ray and they
told me ‘Donald, this is a miracle. You have the perfect skull to
deflect a bullet. No one else has a skull like you.’ Everyone thought it
was really amazing, so amazing, when George dodged that shoe. Well, a
bullet is faster than a shoe, maybe two, three, even four times faster.”

Ubiquitous

2024-07-14 00:38:22 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Or maybe not.... or just the Republicans.

You really need to see a doctor about that mule that kicked you in the
head, Suzique.

--
Let's go Brandon!

BTR1701

2024-07-14 01:28:19 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.

Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

EGK

2024-07-14 01:39:11 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/

If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.

The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
100% came from the rifle-carrying man.

He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.

Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: They blew his
head off.

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.

shawn

2024-07-14 01:46:09 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

Yeah, they just had the guy on the live CBS news feed. He said they
saw the guy come crawling out on the roof with a gun and were yelling
at the police and Secret Service that there was a guy with a gun on
the roof next door to them. Supposedly they were pointing at the man
for a few minutes while the Secret Service and police didn't take any
action (even to move Trump off the stage.)

It that's all true then something went wrong with the protection as
there should have been a quick confirmation of a man with a gun and
then moving Trump off the stage. That much seems obvious.

Post by EGK
“He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.”
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: “They blew his
head off.”
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

BTR1701

2024-07-14 02:21:40 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
100% came from the rifle-carrying man.
He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: They blew his
head off.
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.

By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a matter
of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm wrong but I
see some rough days ahead for the Service.

shawn

2024-07-14 02:47:43 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
“100%” came from the rifle-carrying man.
“He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.”
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: “They blew his
head off.”
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

They are saying that the shooter was outside of their protective area.
Which seems odd because the one guy who was pointing out the shooter
says he was doing it to the Secret Service and police. Which means
either there are Secret Service outside of their protective area or
maybe the guy mistook other security types for Secret Service. Either
way it does seem like someone should have quickly noticed the shooter
when he was being pointed out by a bystander, especially if he was
truly there for a couple of minutes before shooting, and gotten the
former President off the stage.

Yes, it does seem like someone fell down on their job. I know any time
you do one of these outdoor events you are presenting the security
team with an impossible task as there's no way to completely keep a
protectee safe in that environment. Still, there should have been a
quicker response once people noticed the shooter.

BTR1701

2024-07-14 03:06:52 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
“100%” came from the rifle-carrying man.
“He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.”
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: “They blew his
head off.”
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

They are saying that the shooter was outside of their protective area.

Here's an overview of the site and the shooter's position:

https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1812300685037248935

The shooter was outside the secure perimeter. The area outside the perimete
is typically the responsibility of local police to patrol and secure. However
the site agent should have identified those buildings during the advance an
specifically requested the local police have a presence there, at least in th
building to secure it, if not on the roof itself. I know I would have. I wa
site agent for a Trump visit in 2016 at the University of Iowa that was set u
almost exactly the same and there was a 10-story dorm across the street fro
the venue. It was outside the perimeter and I had no Hercules team allotted t
me, so I had local cops on every floor of that dorm and on the roof.

Very possible. Staffers routinely wear USSS-style earpieces and have lape
pins and have been mistaken by both media and the public as USSS many times i
the past.

I found myself in the middle of a media shitstorm back during the Bush
administration when I was working a George Bush speech in Boulder, Colorado,
and staffers saw some leftist protesters they recognized from previous events
and had them thrown out. Since it was a public venue, they went straight to
the ACLU had a lawsuit filed within hours. The lawsuit claimed the Secret
Service threw them out because it was men in dark glasses, earpieces, and
black suits with lapel pins. We eventually sorted it out and identified them
as Bush staffers, but the headlines for several days were "Secret Service
Throws Activists Out of Bush Speech".

Post by shawn
Either way it does seem like someone should have quickly noticed the shooter
when he was being pointed out by a bystander, especially if he was
truly there for a couple of minutes before shooting, and gotten the
former President off the stage.

The question is whether Trump had Hercules counter-sniper support teams there.
Candidates don't always qualify for them, so it's not a given that they were
there. But if they *were* there, it's almost inconceivable that this could
have been allowed to happen. Someone's gonna have to answer some tough
questions.

shawn

2024-07-14 07:04:32 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
“100%” came from the rifle-carrying man.
“He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.”
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: “They blew his
head off.”
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

They are saying that the shooter was outside of their protective area.

https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1812300685037248935
The shooter was outside the secure perimeter. The area outside the perimeter
is typically the responsibility of local police to patrol and secure. However,
the site agent should have identified those buildings during the advance and
specifically requested the local police have a presence there, at least in the
building to secure it, if not on the roof itself. I know I would have. I was
site agent for a Trump visit in 2016 at the University of Iowa that was set up
almost exactly the same and there was a 10-story dorm across the street from
the venue. It was outside the perimeter and I had no Hercules team allotted to
me, so I had local cops on every floor of that dorm and on the roof.

Agreed. From what that video shows it was 150 yards from the stage and
a clear shot. A shot that doesn't seem that difficult if you have the
chance to take multiple shots as the shooter apparently did. Trump is
very lucky that this guy wasn't well trained. Really does seem like
there should have been officers guarding each of those buildings or on
the roofs as there are multiple buildings with a clear line of site to
stage.

Furthermore it seems like there must have been more people on another
roof as that witness on CBS news talked about pointing over at the guy
to try and point him out to the police/Secret Service. So it sounds
like him and his friends were up on one of those roofs. Again, that
sounds like no one secured those buildings.

Very possible. Staffers routinely wear USSS-style earpieces and have lapel
pins and have been mistaken by both media and the public as USSS many times in
the past.
I found myself in the middle of a media shitstorm back during the Bush
administration when I was working a George Bush speech in Boulder, Colorado,
and staffers saw some leftist protesters they recognized from previous events
and had them thrown out. Since it was a public venue, they went straight to
the ACLU had a lawsuit filed within hours. The lawsuit claimed the Secret
Service threw them out because it was men in dark glasses, earpieces, and
black suits with lapel pins. We eventually sorted it out and identified them
as Bush staffers, but the headlines for several days were "Secret Service
Throws Activists Out of Bush Speech".

I don't know how or if you can identify the Hercules counter sniper
support teams, but the images I just saw over on twitter showed a
sniper team set up on a roof top near the stage. It also looked like
the guy reacted to something (maybe the shooting) and then took a
shot. What he was looking at before hand is something only he could
answer because all we see is the agent from the side view.

https://x.com/TimKennedyMMA/status/1812315526992924729/photo/2
The image in the lower right hand corner shows the agent looking out
before the shooting then popping his head up right before the
shooting.

Rhino

2024-07-14 14:09:36 UTC

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 03:06:52 +0000

On Jul 13, 2024 at 7:47:43 PM PDT, "shawn"

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 02:21:40 +0000, BTR1701

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 01:28:19 +0000, BTR1701

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds
like they might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination
attempt succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country
into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection
because of his conviction that Democrats introduced after his
trial didn't go anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only
expect from the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist
tweeted out: "Make America aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some
serious credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for
several minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing
not to take action until between five and eight shots were fired,
the origins of which he said “100%” came from the rifle-carrying
man.
“He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least
three, four minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret
Service, who were looking at us from the top of the barn. They
were looking at us the whole time.”
“They blew his head off.”
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the
Secret Service and the leader of this security detail should
resign.”

By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were
more concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was
only a matter of time before those chickens came home to roost. I
hope I'm wrong but I see some rough days ahead for the Service.

They are saying that the shooter was outside of their protective area.

https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1812300685037248935
The shooter was outside the secure perimeter. The area outside the
perimeter is typically the responsibility of local police to patrol
and secure. However, the site agent should have identified those
buildings during the advance and specifically requested the local
police have a presence there, at least in the building to secure it,
if not on the roof itself. I know I would have. I was site agent for
a Trump visit in 2016 at the University of Iowa that was set up
almost exactly the same and there was a 10-story dorm across the
street from the venue. It was outside the perimeter and I had no
Hercules team allotted to me, so I had local cops on every floor of
that dorm and on the roof.

Which seems odd because the one guy who was pointing out the shooter
says he was doing it to the Secret Service and police. Which means
either there are Secret Service outside of their protective area or
maybe the guy mistook other security types for Secret Service.

Very possible. Staffers routinely wear USSS-style earpieces and have
lapel pins and have been mistaken by both media and the public as
USSS many times in the past.
I found myself in the middle of a media shitstorm back during the Bush
administration when I was working a George Bush speech in Boulder,
Colorado, and staffers saw some leftist protesters they recognized
from previous events and had them thrown out. Since it was a public
venue, they went straight to the ACLU had a lawsuit filed within
hours. The lawsuit claimed the Secret Service threw them out because
it was men in dark glasses, earpieces, and black suits with lapel
pins. We eventually sorted it out and identified them as Bush
staffers, but the headlines for several days were "Secret Service
Throws Activists Out of Bush Speech".

Either way it does seem like someone should have quickly noticed
the shooter when he was being pointed out by a bystander,
especially if he was truly there for a couple of minutes before
shooting, and gotten the former President off the stage.

The question is whether Trump had Hercules counter-sniper support
teams there. Candidates don't always qualify for them, so it's not a
given that they were there. But if they *were* there, it's almost
inconceivable that this could have been allowed to happen. Someone's
gonna have to answer some tough questions.

A report I saw this morning says that the shooter was only 150 yards
from Trump, which is a relatively easy shot. I'm surprised they
wouldn't secure a vantage point that close to the President.

Do we know ANYTHING yet about who shot the other people at the event? At least one person was killed and others
were wounded but I haven't seen one word about who shot them. An
obvious assumption would be that the shooter on the rooftop was
responsible for those shots as well but as soon as it was apparent that
shots were being fired, a whole lot of USSS and other security
personnel had weapons out. It does not seem impossible that they got
off a few rounds as well. I would imagine the stress levels of a
security person go right through the roof at such a time and I've heard
tunnel vision is very common. It would seem plausible that any
protector would want to be proactive and neutralize anyone that looked
like they might be a threat. Anyone with a threatening look on his face
or that was reaching for something that might be a weapon might get
shot as a result.

Am I correct in assuming that the USSS and other agencies that
were there will do a thorough assessment of everything that happened
trying to figure out what they can learn to do a better job next time?

Also, does the agent or agents who neutralized the shooter have to
undergo the same treatment as police officers do after lethal force is
deployed, i.e. surrender their weapons, go on administrative duty,
undergo an investigation to ensure the action was appropriate and get
a signoff from a departmental shrink?

--
Rhino

EGK

2024-07-14 03:09:16 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
100% came from the rifle-carrying man.
He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: They blew his
head off.
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.

They are saying that the shooter was outside of their protective area.

The shooter was only 140yards with a direct line of site to Trump. That's
only the length of a football field including the endzones. It boggles the
mind that they didnt secure all roofs in the area. As far as I know, the SS
usually secures any high point within 2000 yards. This was a major breach.

Post by shawn
Which seems odd because the one guy who was pointing out the shooter
says he was doing it to the Secret Service and police. Which means
either there are Secret Service outside of their protective area or
maybe the guy mistook other security types for Secret Service. Either
way it does seem like someone should have quickly noticed the shooter
when he was being pointed out by a bystander, especially if he was
truly there for a couple of minutes before shooting, and gotten the
former President off the stage.
Yes, it does seem like someone fell down on their job. I know any time
you do one of these outdoor events you are presenting the security
team with an impossible task as there's no way to completely keep a
protectee safe in that environment. Still, there should have been a
quicker response once people noticed the shooter.

There didnt appear to even many buildings in the area so it shoiuldnt have
been a huge task.

There's a picture of the area:
Loading Image...

trotsky

2024-07-14 09:31:31 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
“100%” came from the rifle-carrying man.
“He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.”
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: “They blew his
head off.”
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

They are saying that the shooter was outside of their protective area.

Or it was pre-planned. Obviously.

There didnt appear to even many buildings in the area so it shoiuldnt have
been a huge task.
https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/07/img_3005_720_062feb.jpg?quality=75&strip=all

Ubiquitous

2024-07-14 03:37:20 UTC

Post by EGK
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while on
duty?

--
"I wouldnt have picked vice president Trump to be vice president"
-- Joe Biden

BTR1701

2024-07-14 03:45:58 UTC

Post by EGK
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while on
duty?

No.

Ian J. Ball

2024-07-14 04:04:06 UTC

Post by EGK
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while on
duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

BTR1701

2024-07-14 04:05:07 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a
matter of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm
wrong but I see some rough days ahead for the Service.

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Ian J. Ball

2024-07-14 04:26:02 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a
matter of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm
wrong but I see some rough days ahead for the Service.

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Meh. That's basically pleading that there was no "technical violation".
It's still an awful look.

BTR1701

2024-07-14 04:35:56 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a
matter of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm
wrong but I see some rough days ahead for the Service.

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Meh. That's basically pleading that there was no "technical violation".
It's still an awful look.

Which is why the agents still got in trouble-- some were forced to
resign-- under the catchall "...or anything else that brings the Service
into disrepute."

But there was no actual violation, technical or otherwise.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-07-14 05:14:29 UTC

. . .

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Weren't there actual security concerns given how often prostitutes have
been used to compromise men in sensitive positives (no double entendre
intended)?

BTR1701

2024-07-14 05:40:37 UTC

. . .

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Weren't there actual security concerns given how often prostitutes have
been used to compromise men in sensitive positives (no double entendre
intended)?

I fairly certain that none of the agents involved were married, so there
wasn't really a lot of opportunity for compromise.

"Feed us information or we'll expose to the world that you slept with a
gorgeous latin woman."

"Oh, no! You mean all my friends will know that I had awesome sex with a
hot girl? No, anything but that!"

And intelligence agencies usually use regular women, not pros, to
compromise men. You're not going to spill secrets to a whore but you
might if you think she's a woman who actually likes you and thinks
you're attractive.

anim8rfsk

2024-07-14 06:17:29 UTC

. . .

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Weren't there actual security concerns given how often prostitutes have
been used to compromise men in sensitive positives (no double entendre
intended)?

I fairly certain that none of the agents involved were married, so there
wasn't really a lot of opportunity for compromise.
"Feed us information or we'll expose to the world that you slept with a
gorgeous latin woman."
"Oh, no! You mean all my friends will know that I had awesome sex with a
hot girl? No, anything but that!"
And intelligence agencies usually use regular women, not pros, to
compromise men. You're not going to spill secrets to a whore but you
might if you think she's a woman who actually likes you and thinks
you're attractive.

How did they get the regular women to go for it? (Asking for a friend)

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

BTR1701

2024-07-14 06:31:44 UTC

In article

Post by anim8rfsk

. . .

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Weren't there actual security concerns given how often prostitutes have
been used to compromise men in sensitive positives (no double entendre
intended)?

I fairly certain that none of the agents involved were married, so there
wasn't really a lot of opportunity for compromise.
"Feed us information or we'll expose to the world that you slept with a
gorgeous latin woman."
"Oh, no! You mean all my friends will know that I had awesome sex with a
hot girl? No, anything but that!"
And intelligence agencies usually use regular women, not pros, to
compromise men. You're not going to spill secrets to a whore but you
might if you think she's a woman who actually likes you and thinks
you're attractive.

How did they get the regular women to go for it? (Asking for a friend)

LOL! Well, they're not actually regular. They're intelligence agents who
work honey traps, but part of their act is to appear regular.

The Horny Goat

2024-07-16 20:26:29 UTC

Post by BTR1701
No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

Weren't there actual security concerns given how often prostitutes have
been used to compromise men in sensitive positives (no double entendre
intended)?

I fairly certain that none of the agents involved were married, so there
wasn't really a lot of opportunity for compromise.
"Feed us information or we'll expose to the world that you slept with a
gorgeous latin woman."
"Oh, no! You mean all my friends will know that I had awesome sex with a
hot girl? No, anything but that!"
And intelligence agencies usually use regular women, not pros, to
compromise men. You're not going to spill secrets to a whore but you
might if you think she's a woman who actually likes you and thinks
you're attractive.

There was one Cold War era Canadian diplomat in Moscow who was
confronted by KGB agents with pictures of him with a KGB employed
hooker.

He asked them for copies of glossies for his friends.

(Apparently he was highly lauded by his superiors when he got back to
Ottawa...and no there were no subsequent blackmail attempts...)

Ubiquitous

2024-07-14 07:19:54 UTC

Post by BTR1701
By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a
matter of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm
wrong but I see some rough days ahead for the Service.

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

So I wasn't totally wrong. I remember it being a big deal at the time.

--
Let's go Brandon!

trotsky

2024-07-14 09:28:17 UTC

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

So I wasn't totally wrong. I remember it being a big deal at the time.

As much as I hate to admit it, Pubie, you were totally right and Oath
Keeper Twat was being a lying sack of shit per usual.

"Pubie was right"--that's as perverse as it gets.

trotsky

2024-07-14 09:12:14 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a
matter of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm
wrong but I see some rough days ahead for the Service.

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while
on duty?

No.

But there was a story like that, no? Was it the FBI? instead...

No, it was USSS. They just weren't on duty. And prostitution is legal in
Colombia, so there was no violation of either law or policy involved.

And yet ten guys either were fired or forced into retirement. Just like
you--how weird is that?

trotsky

2024-07-14 09:10:56 UTC

Post by EGK
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

Wasn't there a story about Secret Service partying with hookers while on
duty?

No.

Lying sack of shit alert.

https://www.vox.com/2014/9/30/6870841/white-house-crasher-omar-gonzalez-secret-service-explained

The Secret Service scandals, explained

The story here begins in April 2012, when President Obama traveled to
Cartagena, Colombia, for the Summit of the Americas. While there, a
number of Secret Service agents, DEA agents, and members of the armed
forces assigned to the president's security detail brought prostitutes
back to their hotel rooms. The respective agencies ran their own
investigations and agreed upon punishments. The three DEA agents who
hired prostitutes were reprimanded but kept their jobs; ten Secret
Service agents lost their jobs, either through dismissal, early
retirement, or forced resignation; and twelve service members were
either nonjudicially punished, reprimanded, or asked for courts-martial.

You are the worst fucking liar ever. You either knew these guys or were
part of the the hooker parties or both. And yet, queerly, you're an
anonyshit who doesn't want to tell the truth about himself. What are
the odds of that?

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:59:04 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

https://nypost.com/2024/07/13/us-news/witnesses-frantically-tried-to-warn-police-of-rifle-carrying-sniper-on-roof-before-trump-assassination-attempt/
If that report is true, a lot of the secret service have some serious
credibility problems.
The witness claimed he and his friends tried warning police for several
minutes as Secret Service members watched on, choosing not to take action
until between five and eight shots were fired, the origins of which he said
“100%” came from the rifle-carrying man.
“He was up there for a couple of minutes, absolutely at least three, four
minutes. We were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at
us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time.”
Only after the gunman fired did police neutralize the threat: “They blew his
head off.”
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, “The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.”

Help me out here, I'm having trouble reading between the lines. So all
the stuff with prostitutes was just "boys being boys?"

The US Secret Service prostitution scandal involved as many as 20 women,
11 American agents and some military personnel, senior US officials say.
Senator Susan Collins, briefed by the Secret Service director, said 20
women were found at the US hotel.Apr 18, 2012

US Secret Service Cartagena scandal 'involved 20 women'
BBC
https://www.bbc.com › world-us-canada-17747793

Alternately you could just apologize for sounding like dog shit again.

Ubiquitous

2024-07-16 19:14:29 UTC

Post by EGK
Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, The head of the Secret Service
and the leader of this security detail should resign.

And the people in charge of the operation should be fired.

Post by BTR1701
By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a matter
of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm wrong but I
see some rough days ahead for the Service.

I remember hearing she used to be in charge of store security.

I recently heard they didn't cover the building the sniper used because the
roof was sloped and they were scared an agent might fall off. WTF?!?!?!

--
Let's go Brandon!

BTR1701

2024-07-16 20:56:05 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

This shows the ignorance of so many people on social media, even those
at Elon's level, as to how things actually work.

The SAIC of Trump's detail had nothing to do with the security plan at
that site. The detail leader and the shift agents travel with the
protectee. They don't participate in the security plan of a site and
have never even seen the site until the moment they arrive with the
protectee.

It's the advance agents from the local field office (in this case
Pittsburgh) who spend the week before the visit developing the security
plan. The site agent is tasked with developing the plan, the protective
intelligence agent is responsible for coordinating with police to
determine any locals who might bear watching or need to be interviewed
based on past behavior, and background-checking everyone working the
event inside the secure perimeter. After the plan is in place, the field
office will assign a supervisor to walk through the site with the site
agent, the PI agent, and the local police bosses to make sure all bases
were covered. Once the supe approves the plan, the site agent will call
Trump's detail leader 24 hours ahead of time and brief him on the visit.

In this case, it's going to be the site agent (who I think is Agent
Ponytail in the footage from the attack, although it's hard to be sure
with all the confusion) and the field office supe who are going to be on
the hot seat about that building and why it wasn't addressed in the
security plan. Not Trump's detail leader.

I also don't understand how the social media intelligentsia-- the truck
drivers, nurses, school teachers and accountants who instantly become
experts on anything that happens in the world-- and the legacy media
pundits decide on their chain of responsibility when something like this
happens. They immediately call for the director to be fired and the
detail leader on the theory, one assumes, that if one of her underlings
screwed up this badly, she bears the responsibility for it, too.

But if that's the criteria, then what about the local field office? The
field office supe signed off on the plan, but he's just a GS-14 ATSAIC.
What about his direct boss? The ASAIC of the field office should also be
fired, too, right? And his boss, the SAIC of Pittsburgh. Also fired
according to social media standards. And the SAIC's boss-- the Assistant
Director for Protective Operations. Also fired. And what about the
ADPO's boss? The deputy director should also go. And then finally we get
to the director. There's about seven levels of management between the
director and the field agent who set up the security plan and according
to the criteria established by the experts on social media, they all
should be fired because someone below them screwed up.

And why does it stop with the director? Shouldn't the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Continuity of Government also resign because someone below
him screwed up? And his boss, the Undersecretary of Homeland Security
should also be fired, as well as Mayorkas himself, the Secretary of
Homeland Security. And of course Mayorkas's boss-- Joe Biden-- should
also resign since someone below him screwed up.

How do the social media and legacy media gurus decide who is and is not
responsible for the lapses of those below them in the chain of command
such that some should be fired and others not?

Whatever it is, I'm sure they're right. They're the experts, after all.

Post by Ubiquitous
And the people in charge of the operation should be fired.

Post by BTR1701
By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a matter
of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm wrong but I
see some rough days ahead for the Service.

I remember hearing she used to be in charge of store security.

Kim Cheadle was a career Secret Service agent for 20+ years, then
retired and went to work for Pepsi before coming back to the USSS when
she was nominated as director.

I agree she needs to answer some tough questions about what happened
last weekend and possibly be replaced as a result of it, but let's
dispense with the nonsense that's all over Twitter and Facebook that she
never had any experience protecting high-level officials and did nothing
but protect soda pop before being named USSS director.

Post by Ubiquitous
I recently heard they didn't cover the building the sniper used because
the roof was sloped and they were scared an agent might fall off. WTF?!?!?!

I have yet to hear anyone explain the nature of that building. Is it a
government warehouse or something that could have been posted with no
problem or is it private property, where the police and the government
had no access if the owner didn't consent?

You can't clear a building or even access the property if it's private
property and you don't have consent of the owner. They could have posted
police *around* it to limit access during the visit, but doing anything
on the property itself would have required consent of the owner.

Obviously, when a guy's crawling up the roof with a rifle, that's
exigent circumstances and you can act, but in the days leading up to the
visit, if that building is private property, the USSS and the police
couldn't access it or put anyone on the roof on the day of the visit
without consent of the owner.

People don't lose their private property rights or their rights under
the 4th Amendment just because the president decides to visit their
neighborhood.

The last year of the Obama presidency, I stood post for a visit to Vegas
where he was going to arrive in a residential neighborhood via
motorcade, walk down a cul de sac to the house at the end, and have
lunch with the family that lived there and feel their financial pain
with them.

Well, that cul de sac was lined with about eight other homes on either
side of the street and only about half the owners were fans enough of
Obama to grant permission to have us bring in K9 teams and sweep their
homes for bombs and guns. The others wouldn't consent. We had no idea
how many people or guns were in each house as the president walked past
30 feet away and there was nothing we could legally do about it.

Best we could do was triple the number of posts we would normally have
for something like that, with two agents assigned to each home, standing
in the street and instructed to never take their eyes off the windows
and doors, and given an MP5 full-auto machine gun to openly carry the
entire time Obama was on scene.

Even the houses we were allowed to sweep presented a problem because
some of them were gun owners, too, and while they granted consent for
the sweep, they weren't as cooperative with our request to take custody
of their firearms for the duration of the visit.

All so that staff could have a feel-good photo-op with Obama pretending
to know what it's like living paycheck-to-paycheck with some random
family.

trotsky

2024-07-17 09:45:01 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

This shows the ignorance of so many people on social media, even those
at Elon's level, as to how things actually work.

No doubt, becuase this info. (intel?) is so well publicized. Do you
need a primer on what the word "secret" means?

Post by BTR1701
The SAIC of Trump's detail had nothing to do with the security plan at
that site. The detail leader and the shift agents travel with the
protectee. They don't participate in the security plan of a site and
have never even seen the site until the moment they arrive with the
protectee.
It's the advance agents from the local field office (in this case
Pittsburgh) who spend the week before the visit developing the security
plan. The site agent is tasked with developing the plan, the protective
intelligence agent is responsible for coordinating with police to
determine any locals who might bear watching or need to be interviewed
based on past behavior, and background-checking everyone working the
event inside the secure perimeter. After the plan is in place, the field
office will assign a supervisor to walk through the site with the site
agent, the PI agent, and the local police bosses to make sure all bases
were covered. Once the supe approves the plan, the site agent will call
Trump's detail leader 24 hours ahead of time and brief him on the visit.
In this case, it's going to be the site agent (who I think is Agent
Ponytail in the footage from the attack, although it's hard to be sure
with all the confusion) and the field office supe who are going to be on
the hot seat about that building and why it wasn't addressed in the
security plan. Not Trump's detail leader.
I also don't understand how the social media intelligentsia-- the truck
drivers, nurses, school teachers and accountants who instantly become
experts on anything that happens in the world-- and the legacy media
pundits decide on their chain of responsibility when something like this
happens. They immediately call for the director to be fired and the
detail leader on the theory, one assumes, that if one of her underlings
screwed up this badly, she bears the responsibility for it, too.
But if that's the criteria, then what about the local field office? The
field office supe signed off on the plan, but he's just a GS-14 ATSAIC.
What about his direct boss? The ASAIC of the field office should also be
fired, too, right? And his boss, the SAIC of Pittsburgh. Also fired
according to social media standards. And the SAIC's boss-- the Assistant
Director for Protective Operations. Also fired. And what about the
ADPO's boss? The deputy director should also go. And then finally we get
to the director. There's about seven levels of management between the
director and the field agent who set up the security plan and according
to the criteria established by the experts on social media, they all
should be fired because someone below them screwed up.
And why does it stop with the director? Shouldn't the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Continuity of Government also resign because someone below
him screwed up? And his boss, the Undersecretary of Homeland Security
should also be fired, as well as Mayorkas himself, the Secretary of
Homeland Security. And of course Mayorkas's boss-- Joe Biden-- should
also resign since someone below him screwed up.
How do the social media and legacy media gurus decide who is and is not
responsible for the lapses of those below them in the chain of command
such that some should be fired and others not?
Whatever it is, I'm sure they're right. They're the experts, after all.

Post by Ubiquitous
And the people in charge of the operation should be fired.

Post by BTR1701
By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a matter
of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm wrong but I
see some rough days ahead for the Service.

I remember hearing she used to be in charge of store security.

Kim Cheadle was a career Secret Service agent for 20+ years, then
retired and went to work for Pepsi before coming back to the USSS when
she was nominated as director.
I agree she needs to answer some tough questions about what happened
last weekend and possibly be replaced as a result of it, but let's
dispense with the nonsense that's all over Twitter and Facebook that she
never had any experience protecting high-level officials and did nothing
but protect soda pop before being named USSS director.

Post by Ubiquitous
I recently heard they didn't cover the building the sniper used because
the roof was sloped and they were scared an agent might fall off. WTF?!?!?!

I have yet to hear anyone explain the nature of that building. Is it a
government warehouse or something that could have been posted with no
problem or is it private property, where the police and the government
had no access if the owner didn't consent?
You can't clear a building or even access the property if it's private
property and you don't have consent of the owner. They could have posted
police *around* it to limit access during the visit, but doing anything
on the property itself would have required consent of the owner.
Obviously, when a guy's crawling up the roof with a rifle, that's
exigent circumstances and you can act, but in the days leading up to the
visit, if that building is private property, the USSS and the police
couldn't access it or put anyone on the roof on the day of the visit
without consent of the owner.
People don't lose their private property rights or their rights under
the 4th Amendment just because the president decides to visit their
neighborhood.
The last year of the Obama presidency, I stood post for a visit to Vegas
where he was going to arrive in a residential neighborhood via
motorcade, walk down a cul de sac to the house at the end, and have
lunch with the family that lived there and feel their financial pain
with them.
Well, that cul de sac was lined with about eight other homes on either
side of the street and only about half the owners were fans enough of
Obama to grant permission to have us bring in K9 teams and sweep their
homes for bombs and guns. The others wouldn't consent. We had no idea
how many people or guns were in each house as the president walked past
30 feet away and there was nothing we could legally do about it.
Best we could do was triple the number of posts we would normally have
for something like that, with two agents assigned to each home, standing
in the street and instructed to never take their eyes off the windows
and doors, and given an MP5 full-auto machine gun to openly carry the
entire time Obama was on scene.
Even the houses we were allowed to sweep presented a problem because
some of them were gun owners, too, and while they granted consent for
the sweep, they weren't as cooperative with our request to take custody
of their firearms for the duration of the visit.
All so that staff could have a feel-good photo-op with Obama pretending
to know what it's like living paycheck-to-paycheck with some random
family.

Ubiquitous

2024-07-17 08:30:42 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

This shows the ignorance of so many people on social media, even those
at Elon's level, as to how things actually work.
The SAIC of Trump's detail had nothing to do with the security plan at
that site. The detail leader and the shift agents travel with the
protectee. They don't participate in the security plan of a site and
have never even seen the site until the moment they arrive with the
protectee.
It's the advance agents from the local field office (in this case
Pittsburgh) who spend the week before the visit developing the security
plan. The site agent is tasked with developing the plan, the protective
intelligence agent is responsible for coordinating with police to
determine any locals who might bear watching or need to be interviewed
based on past behavior, and background-checking everyone working the
event inside the secure perimeter. After the plan is in place, the field
office will assign a supervisor to walk through the site with the site
agent, the PI agent, and the local police bosses to make sure all bases
were covered. Once the supe approves the plan, the site agent will call
Trump's detail leader 24 hours ahead of time and brief him on the visit.
In this case, it's going to be the site agent (who I think is Agent
Ponytail in the footage from the attack, although it's hard to be sure
with all the confusion) and the field office supe who are going to be on
the hot seat about that building and why it wasn't addressed in the
security plan. Not Trump's detail leader.
I also don't understand how the social media intelligentsia-- the truck
drivers, nurses, school teachers and accountants who instantly become
experts on anything that happens in the world-- and the legacy media
pundits decide on their chain of responsibility when something like this
happens. They immediately call for the director to be fired and the
detail leader on the theory, one assumes, that if one of her underlings
screwed up this badly, she bears the responsibility for it, too.
But if that's the criteria, then what about the local field office? The
field office supe signed off on the plan, but he's just a GS-14 ATSAIC.
What about his direct boss? The ASAIC of the field office should also be
fired, too, right? And his boss, the SAIC of Pittsburgh. Also fired
according to social media standards. And the SAIC's boss-- the Assistant
Director for Protective Operations. Also fired. And what about the
ADPO's boss? The deputy director should also go. And then finally we get
to the director. There's about seven levels of management between the
director and the field agent who set up the security plan and according
to the criteria established by the experts on social media, they all
should be fired because someone below them screwed up.
And why does it stop with the director? Shouldn't the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Continuity of Government also resign because someone below
him screwed up? And his boss, the Undersecretary of Homeland Security
should also be fired, as well as Mayorkas himself, the Secretary of
Homeland Security. And of course Mayorkas's boss-- Joe Biden-- should
also resign since someone below him screwed up.
How do the social media and legacy media gurus decide who is and is not
responsible for the lapses of those below them in the chain of command
such that some should be fired and others not?
Whatever it is, I'm sure they're right. They're the experts, after all.

Than ks for the insight. If it's not the SAIC, someone must be held accountable.

Post by Ubiquitous
And the people in charge of the operation should be fired.

Post by BTR1701
By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a matter
of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm wrong but I
see some rough days ahead for the Service.

I remember hearing she used to be in charge of store security.

Kim Cheadle was a career Secret Service agent for 20+ years, then
retired and went to work for Pepsi before coming back to the USSS when
she was nominated as director.

I did not know that! Thanks!

Post by BTR1701
I agree she needs to answer some tough questions about what happened
last weekend and possibly be replaced as a result of it, but let's
dispense with the nonsense that's all over Twitter and Facebook that she
never had any experience protecting high-level officials and did nothing
but protect soda pop before being named USSS director.

Wait, didn't you say it's not her fault?

Post by Ubiquitous
I recently heard they didn't cover the building the sniper used because
the roof was sloped and they were scared an agent might fall off. WTF?!?!?!

I did not realize that a building owner could refuse, but what do they
do if they cannot secure a building? Put up a barrier to block the view?

Also, as I understand it, there was no one around the building in the first place.

Post by BTR1701
Obviously, when a guy's crawling up the roof with a rifle, that's
exigent circumstances and you can act, but in the days leading up to the
visit, if that building is private property, the USSS and the police
couldn't access it or put anyone on the roof on the day of the visit
without consent of the owner.
People don't lose their private property rights or their rights under
the 4th Amendment just because the president decides to visit their
neighborhood.
The last year of the Obama presidency, I stood post for a visit to Vegas
where he was going to arrive in a residential neighborhood via
motorcade, walk down a cul de sac to the house at the end, and have
lunch with the family that lived there and feel their financial pain
with them.
Well, that cul de sac was lined with about eight other homes on either
side of the street and only about half the owners were fans enough of
Obama to grant permission to have us bring in K9 teams and sweep their
homes for bombs and guns. The others wouldn't consent. We had no idea
how many people or guns were in each house as the president walked past
30 feet away and there was nothing we could legally do about it.
Best we could do was triple the number of posts we would normally have
for something like that, with two agents assigned to each home, standing
in the street and instructed to never take their eyes off the windows
and doors, and given an MP5 full-auto machine gun to openly carry the
entire time Obama was on scene.
Even the houses we were allowed to sweep presented a problem because
some of them were gun owners, too, and while they granted consent for
the sweep, they weren't as cooperative with our request to take custody
of their firearms for the duration of the visit.
All so that staff could have a feel-good photo-op with Obama pretending
to know what it's like living paycheck-to-paycheck with some random
family.

#ThanksObama

--
Let's go Brandon!

BTR1701

2024-07-17 14:30:29 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

This shows the ignorance of so many people on social media, even those
at Elon's level, as to how things actually work.
The SAIC of Trump's detail had nothing to do with the security plan at
that site. The detail leader and the shift agents travel with the
protectee. They don't participate in the security plan of a site and
have never even seen the site until the moment they arrive with the
protectee.
It's the advance agents from the local field office (in this case
Pittsburgh) who spend the week before the visit developing the security
plan. The site agent is tasked with developing the plan, the protective
intelligence agent is responsible for coordinating with police to
determine any locals who might bear watching or need to be interviewed
based on past behavior, and background-checking everyone working the
event inside the secure perimeter. After the plan is in place, the field
office will assign a supervisor to walk through the site with the site
agent, the PI agent, and the local police bosses to make sure all bases
were covered. Once the supe approves the plan, the site agent will call
Trump's detail leader 24 hours ahead of time and brief him on the visit.
In this case, it's going to be the site agent (who I think is Agent
Ponytail in the footage from the attack, although it's hard to be sure
with all the confusion) and the field office supe who are going to be on
the hot seat about that building and why it wasn't addressed in the
security plan. Not Trump's detail leader.
I also don't understand how the social media intelligentsia-- the truck
drivers, nurses, school teachers and accountants who instantly become
experts on anything that happens in the world-- and the legacy media
pundits decide on their chain of responsibility when something like this
happens. They immediately call for the director to be fired and the
detail leader on the theory, one assumes, that if one of her underlings
screwed up this badly, she bears the responsibility for it, too.
But if that's the criteria, then what about the local field office? The
field office supe signed off on the plan, but he's just a GS-14 ATSAIC.
What about his direct boss? The ASAIC of the field office should also be
fired, too, right? And his boss, the SAIC of Pittsburgh. Also fired
according to social media standards. And the SAIC's boss-- the Assistant
Director for Protective Operations. Also fired. And what about the
ADPO's boss? The deputy director should also go. And then finally we get
to the director. There's about seven levels of management between the
director and the field agent who set up the security plan and according
to the criteria established by the experts on social media, they all
should be fired because someone below them screwed up.
And why does it stop with the director? Shouldn't the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Continuity of Government also resign because someone below
him screwed up? And his boss, the Undersecretary of Homeland Security
should also be fired, as well as Mayorkas himself, the Secretary of
Homeland Security. And of course Mayorkas's boss-- Joe Biden-- should
also resign since someone below him screwed up.
How do the social media and legacy media gurus decide who is and is not
responsible for the lapses of those below them in the chain of command
such that some should be fired and others not?
Whatever it is, I'm sure they're right. They're the experts, after all.

Than ks for the insight. If it's not the SAIC, someone must be held accountable.

Post by Ubiquitous
And the people in charge of the operation should be fired.

Post by BTR1701
By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a matter
of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm wrong but I
see some rough days ahead for the Service.

I remember hearing she used to be in charge of store security.

Kim Cheatle was a career Secret Service agent for 20+ years, then
retired and went to work for Pepsi before coming back to the USSS when
she was nominated as director.

I did not know that! Thanks!

Wait, didn't you say it's not her fault?

Post by Ubiquitous
I recently heard they didn't cover the building the sniper used because
the roof was sloped and they were scared an agent might fall off. WTF?!?!?!

I did not realize that a building owner could refuse, but what do they
do if they cannot secure a building? Put up a barrier to block the view?

Yes. I used to use all the media satellite trucks to block line of
sight. Let MSNBC and CNN take the incoming fire.

Post by Ubiquitous
Also, as I understand it, there was no one around the building in the first place.

#ThanksObama
--
Let's go Brandon!

trotsky

2024-07-18 09:05:06 UTC

Elon Musk posted the video on X, writing, "The head of the Secret
Service and the leader of this security detail should resign."

This shows the ignorance of so many people on social media, even those
at Elon's level, as to how things actually work.
The SAIC of Trump's detail had nothing to do with the security plan at
that site. The detail leader and the shift agents travel with the
protectee. They don't participate in the security plan of a site and
have never even seen the site until the moment they arrive with the
protectee.
It's the advance agents from the local field office (in this case
Pittsburgh) who spend the week before the visit developing the security
plan. The site agent is tasked with developing the plan, the protective
intelligence agent is responsible for coordinating with police to
determine any locals who might bear watching or need to be interviewed
based on past behavior, and background-checking everyone working the
event inside the secure perimeter. After the plan is in place, the field
office will assign a supervisor to walk through the site with the site
agent, the PI agent, and the local police bosses to make sure all bases
were covered. Once the supe approves the plan, the site agent will call
Trump's detail leader 24 hours ahead of time and brief him on the visit.
In this case, it's going to be the site agent (who I think is Agent
Ponytail in the footage from the attack, although it's hard to be sure
with all the confusion) and the field office supe who are going to be on
the hot seat about that building and why it wasn't addressed in the
security plan. Not Trump's detail leader.
I also don't understand how the social media intelligentsia-- the truck
drivers, nurses, school teachers and accountants who instantly become
experts on anything that happens in the world-- and the legacy media
pundits decide on their chain of responsibility when something like this
happens. They immediately call for the director to be fired and the
detail leader on the theory, one assumes, that if one of her underlings
screwed up this badly, she bears the responsibility for it, too.
But if that's the criteria, then what about the local field office? The
field office supe signed off on the plan, but he's just a GS-14 ATSAIC.
What about his direct boss? The ASAIC of the field office should also be
fired, too, right? And his boss, the SAIC of Pittsburgh. Also fired
according to social media standards. And the SAIC's boss-- the Assistant
Director for Protective Operations. Also fired. And what about the
ADPO's boss? The deputy director should also go. And then finally we get
to the director. There's about seven levels of management between the
director and the field agent who set up the security plan and according
to the criteria established by the experts on social media, they all
should be fired because someone below them screwed up.
And why does it stop with the director? Shouldn't the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Continuity of Government also resign because someone below
him screwed up? And his boss, the Undersecretary of Homeland Security
should also be fired, as well as Mayorkas himself, the Secretary of
Homeland Security. And of course Mayorkas's boss-- Joe Biden-- should
also resign since someone below him screwed up.
How do the social media and legacy media gurus decide who is and is not
responsible for the lapses of those below them in the chain of command
such that some should be fired and others not?
Whatever it is, I'm sure they're right. They're the experts, after all.

Than ks for the insight. If it's not the SAIC, someone must be held accountable.

Post by Ubiquitous
And the people in charge of the operation should be fired.

Post by BTR1701
By the time I left, the recruitment and promotion divisions were more
concerned about DEI than hiring the best of the best. It was only a matter
of time before those chickens came home to roost. I hope I'm wrong but I
see some rough days ahead for the Service.

I remember hearing she used to be in charge of store security.

Kim Cheatle was a career Secret Service agent for 20+ years, then
retired and went to work for Pepsi before coming back to the USSS when
she was nominated as director.

I did not know that! Thanks!

Wait, didn't you say it's not her fault?

Post by Ubiquitous
I recently heard they didn't cover the building the sniper used because
the roof was sloped and they were scared an agent might fall off. WTF?!?!?!

I did not realize that a building owner could refuse, but what do they
do if they cannot secure a building? Put up a barrier to block the view?

Yes. I used to use all the media satellite trucks to block line of
sight. Let MSNBC and CNN take the incoming fire.

So you're blaming the Secret Service too, cool.

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:44:30 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Yep, I am also hearing the shooter is dead, as is an attendee.
Gotta wonder what would have happened had this assassination attempt
succeeded - it would have plunged the whole country into real chaos.

Wow, the gay guys on this group sure are idiots. Instead of a national
day of mourning it would be a national day of happiness.

Post by BTR1701
It's a good thing that bill to strip Trump of USSS protection because of
his conviction that Democrats introduced after his trial didn't go
anywhere.

Sure, because the USSS did something that a regular police force
couldn't have done: entertain a bunch of hookers. Holy fuck I laugh
harder at stuff you post than anything else I've ever seen.

Post by BTR1701
Meanwhile, I burst of the kind of class and dignity we can only expect from
the corporate legacy media, a Seattle journalist tweeted out: "Make America
aim again."

Robin Miller

2024-07-14 01:46:12 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Could you hear that in the audio of the shooting that was played on TV?

An attendee being interviewed on TV said that sharpshooters took out a
shooter in a water tower, although she thought there was a second
shooter who got away. I hope/guess not.

I'm no Trump fan, but this is utterly horrifying.

--Robin

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:39:27 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Looks like he was hit in the ear.
Means the shooter f**ked up.

You can hear the CAT guys saying "Shooter's down". Sounds like they
might have given him a lead shower.

Sounds like the whole thing was dreamed up by that psychotic fuck
Stephen Miller and the shooter was played as a patsy. Interestingly, a
fake assassination attempt was depicted in the black comedy Bob Roberts.
Live imitating art.

FPP

2024-07-14 00:20:30 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.
--
On May 30, 2024 Donald J. Trump was unanimously convicted on 34 felony
counts in New York City... so I took this picture in my side yard.

Loading Image...

"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part
%20II.jpg?dl=0

super70s

2024-07-14 01:17:26 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

Maybe it'll be like the time a coconut fell on Gilligan's head and
turned him into a completely different person -- now Trump will start
telling the truth instead of lying all the time.

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:41:43 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

Maybe it'll be like the time a coconut fell on Gilligan's head and
turned him into a completely different person -- now Trump will start
telling the truth instead of lying all the time.

Unfortunately the Vegas odds on this are ten trillion to one.

Ubiquitous

2024-07-19 19:15:26 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

Maybe it'll be like the time a coconut fell on Gilligan's head and
turned him into a completely different person

Near death experiences are life-changing events to people.

--
"I wouldnt have picked vice president Trump to be vice president"
-- Joe Biden

BTR1701

2024-07-14 01:28:19 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week that "the
bullseye is on Trump".

We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such 'bullseye'
political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter to act and therefore
made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.

So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for the attack
on Trump.

Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

super70s

2024-07-14 01:56:39 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week that "the
bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such 'bullseye'
political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter to act and therefore
made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for the attack
on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in his
own political speeches to equalize the above.

BTR1701

2024-07-14 03:07:24 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week that "the
bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such 'bullseye'
political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter to act and therefore
made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for the attack
on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in his
own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

super70s

2024-07-14 05:01:45 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week that "the
bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such 'bullseye'
political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter to act and therefore
made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for the attack
on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in his
own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's no
way you can rebutt it.

BTR1701

2024-07-14 05:07:51 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week that
"the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter to
act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for the
attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in his
own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's no
way you can rebutt it.

<yawn>

Rhino

2024-07-14 20:59:49 UTC

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

--
Rhino

super70s

2024-07-17 10:19:25 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

moviePig

2024-07-17 16:19:09 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

You must be wrong, as you haven't quoted Shakespeare...

trotsky

2024-07-18 09:15:51 UTC

Post by moviePig

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

You must be wrong, as you haven't quoted Shakespeare...

It's like a pinball machine reading "Tilt."

Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player That struts and frets his
hour upon the stage And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an
idiot, full of sound and fury Signifying nothing.

Shakespeare's Macbeth Act 5, scene 5 - Manhasset Schools
Manhasset Union Free School District
https://www.manhassetschools.org › lib8 › Domain

It's even better when you hear the full quote and realize he was talking
about life. I can see the conundrum of course, unless it's derivative
fucking bullshit such as George Lucas or John Williams the Lesser you
can't comprehend it. I'm sure you get plenty of acceptance from the
Oath Keepers of course.

super70s

2024-07-18 17:09:50 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

You must be wrong, as you haven't quoted Shakespeare...

I had a hardass English teacher when I was a senior in high school who
made everyone memorize that passage and take turns getting up before
the class and recite it. I never forgot it to this day.

Also Christopher Marlowe's "The Passionate Shepherd to His Love" but I
only remember the first line of that one.

trotsky

2024-07-19 08:56:42 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

You must be wrong, as you haven't quoted Shakespeare...

I had a hardass English teacher when I was a senior in high school who
made everyone memorize that passage and take turns getting up before the
class and recite it. I never forgot it to this day.
Also Christopher Marlowe's "The Passionate Shepherd to His Love" but I
only remember the first line of that one.

I've never read Marlowe but it will be on my bucket list.

super70s

2024-07-20 03:28:13 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

You must be wrong, as you haven't quoted Shakespeare...

I had a hardass English teacher when I was a senior in high school who
made everyone memorize that passage and take turns getting up before
the class and recite it. I never forgot it to this day.
Also Christopher Marlowe's "The Passionate Shepherd to His Love" but I
only remember the first line of that one.

I've never read Marlowe but it will be on my bucket list.

He was supposedly a big influence on The Bard. According to legend the
poor guy was knifed to death in bar fight, what a cruel end for someone
who wrote such beautiful poetry.

trotsky

2024-07-20 09:41:11 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

You must be wrong, as you haven't quoted Shakespeare...

I had a hardass English teacher when I was a senior in high school
who made everyone memorize that passage and take turns getting up
before the class and recite it. I never forgot it to this day.
Also Christopher Marlowe's "The Passionate Shepherd to His Love" but
I only remember the first line of that one.

I've never read Marlowe but it will be on my bucket list.

He was supposedly a big influence on The Bard. According to legend the
poor guy was knifed to death in bar fight, what a cruel end for someone
who wrote such beautiful poetry.

What if he was the one writing under the name of Shakespeare?

super70s

2024-07-24 00:43:53 UTC

Post by Rhino
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 00:01:45 -0500

On Jul 13, 2024 at 6:56:39 PM PDT, "super70s"

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've
come to expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week
that "the bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for
the attack on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in
his own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Nothing substantial in rebuttal, as usual. Because you know there's
no way you can rebutt it.

Shakespeare, in a truly uncanny act of prescience, reacted to your
remark with the words: "full of sound and fury and signifying nothing".

No he said it about the idiot who started slinging insults when
presented with the cold hard truth, that wasn't me.

You must be wrong, as you haven't quoted Shakespeare...

I had a hardass English teacher when I was a senior in high school who
made everyone memorize that passage and take turns getting up before
the class and recite it. I never forgot it to this day.
Also Christopher Marlowe's "The Passionate Shepherd to His Love" but I
only remember the first line of that one.

I've never read Marlowe but it will be on my bucket list.

He was supposedly a big influence on The Bard. According to legend the
poor guy was knifed to death in bar fight, what a cruel end for someone
who wrote such beautiful poetry.

What if he was the one writing under the name of Shakespeare?

There have been some fictionalized movies that get into Shakespeare's
works being written by other authors, 2011's Anonymous and 2001's Much
Ado About Something.

trotsky

2024-07-14 09:06:16 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week that "the
bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such 'bullseye'
political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter to act and therefore
made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for the attack
on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in his
own political speeches to equalize the above.

LOL! You're a cartoon, you know that, right?

Utter lack of self awareness noted.

Ubiquitous

2024-07-14 03:34:03 UTC

Post by FPP
Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden told the crowd at one of rallies last week that "the
bullseye is on Trump".
We were told by Democrats after the Giffords shooting that such
'bullseye' political rhetoric by Sarah Palin incited the shooter
to act and therefore made Palin responsible for Giffords' attack.
So the Democrats' own logic means Joe Biden is responsible for the attack
on Trump.
Lemme guess... this is somehow "different".

Nice try but Trump has more than enough incitations to violence in his
own political speeches to equalize the above.

Wow, thanks for making BTR's point!

--
"I wouldnt have picked vice president Trump to be vice president"
-- Joe Biden

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:47:00 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

There's that famous 'progressive' class and sensitivity we've come to
expect.

You are such a piece of dog shit. Someone on Facebook responded to the
news with "Bleeding from his whereever." Now you, instead of being dog
shit, explain to the group why this is clever and why sociopath Trump
deserves no sympathy whatsoever.

Further dog shit from the purveyor of dog shit snipped.

trotsky

2024-07-14 08:40:52 UTC

Post by Capricorne
Where they shots?

Sometimes, bad things happen to bad people.

Are you talking about the shooting or "Capricorne's" attempt to speak
English?

Norm Chomsky

2024-07-19 08:11:57 UTC

Seventy-two hours after an assassin shot and nearly killed Donald Trump in
Pennsylvania, here’s the official story so far: A random 20-year-old acting
completely alone walked within 150 yards of a presidential campaign rally
with a rifle, climbed onto a rooftop in full view of Secret Service snipers,
set up his shot and fired without anyone intervening and with no help from
anyone.

This 20-year-old is also so politically radical as to attempt an
assassination and yet not radical enough to have ever posted any political
writings or commentary on any social media site ever in his life. He also
wrote no manifesto and left behind no indication about why he did it. Even
after authorities gained access to his phone, they say they still have no
clue about his motivations. All we’re told is that, for some reason, he
obviously wanted Donald Trump dead. There’s just a handful of videos of the
shooter circulating, including one in which he makes some weird sexual joke,
and one in which he appears briefly in a Blackrock video featuring his high
school classroom. Other than that, it’s as if he never existed.

As far as we can tell, this man’s last and only political act, before
attempting to kill the Republican candidate, was to register as a
Republican. Oh and apparently, there were Trump signs outside of his parent’s
home, where he was living. Watch:

We have no idea why these signs are outside the shooter’s home. We have no
clarity on this point whatsoever because none of this makes sense and no one’s
explaining anything. Nevertheless, you must believe the official narrative
and ask no questions about it or else you are a conspiracy theorist. And one
thing we know about assassination attempts is that there’s never any
conspiring involved.

As unbelievable and insulting as it is, this is the version of events you’re
being told to accept. But with every hour that goes by, it somehow makes
even less sense than it did before. Every new detail is more baffling than
the last.

Last night, for instance CBS News reported that several Beaver County police
snipers were stationed _inside_ the building the shooter eventually climbed
on top of. They were supposedly looking for threats in the crowd at the
rally. There were no officers or snipers on the roof, for reasons that
remain unexplained, even though that’d be the rational spot to place these
snipers. But it’s now an uncontested fact that the shooter used the police
staging area as a vantage point to shoot Donald Trump.

According to the local outlet Beaver Countian, which broke the story,

A security operations plan had placed each of the three
counter-snipers inside of the building looking out of windows
toward the rally, with none stationed on its roof. Due to a
lack of manpower, the men did not have spotters assigned to
them, as would be standard operating procedure.

So maybe the excuse is that they couldn’t spare anyone to watch the roof.
They just ran out of people. Obviously we need to know exactly who drafted
that “security operations plan,” because that person should never be in
charge of any security operation ever again.

Nevertheless, roughly a half hour before the shooting started, these snipers
positioned inside the building saw the 20-year-old shooter — without his
rifle — “looking up at the roof observing the building” before he
disappeared, then came back and sat down. This was so suspicious that one of
the snipers inside the building took a photo of the gunman.

Additionally, according to a separate local news station, “a law enforcement
officer had also previously seen Crooks on the ground and called him in as a
suspicious person with a picture before 5:45 p.m.” Officers supposedly
looked around but couldn’t immediately find him.

Just to review: this man was on the radar of the security forces at the
rally 30 _minutes_ before he fired the first shot. And he fired it on top of
the very same building where the police were staged.

Already, 30 minutes before the crime took place, they had enough reason to
detain this guy and delay the rally. But it gets even worse.

At one point, in full view of the snipers inside the command post, the
gunman, “took out a range finder,” prompting the police sniper to radio his
command post. That meant that he alerted the Secret Service to the threat.
But still, no one detained the man, and no one pulled Trump off the stage —
even though there’s only one reason a suspicious person would be using a
range finder right outside a Trump rally, and everyone knows what it is.
There is no conceivable innocent reason for a guy to be lurking around the
site of a campaign rally with a range finder. Or if there is an innocent
reason, the innocent reason is significantly less plausible than the
sinister reason. Yet nothing was done. So the man disappeared again, then
came back a third time — this time carrying a backpack. And once again, the
snipers called in to their command post, explaining that this suspicious man
was now “walking towards the back of the building.” But nobody stopped him.
Nobody took any physical action to prevent what they could evidently see
coming.

Apparently, all of these reports prompted some police officers to call for
backup and try to scale the roof to stop the shooter. But they obviously
failed to do so. The gunman climbed on top of the building using an air
conditioning unit — not a ladder as previously reported — and fired several
shots at Trump before he was taken out.

So what explains why Donald Trump wasn’t taken off the stage at any point in
this process, until a gunman shot him in the head? Why didn’t Secret Service
snipers on the roof behind Trump take out this shooter before he was able to
open fire? If you look at some of the videos from the rally, you’ll notice
that initially, the snipers behind Trump appear to be relaxed at first. They’re
standing up. They’re not in the prone position, looking through their rifle
scopes. But then, some people in the bleachers see something. They start
pointing. And eventually the Secret Service snipers go prone, clearly
responding to a threat. Here are the two clips:

This is a much more serious failure than we were told it was. This is not a
case of the Secret Service somehow failing to notice the shooter. They
clearly knew he was there, or that some potentially imminent threat was very
close to the stage. We know that from the video. We know it from the
reporting. At a minimum, they had reason to think that Trump was in imminent
danger. But they essentially did nothing in response. They let Trump take a
bullet to the head before they addressed the threat in any way.

According to the Biden administration, we shouldn’t be outraged or concerned
about any of this. Yesterday, the head of the DHS, Alejandro Mayorkas,
explained that he has “100% confidence” in the director of the Secret
Service (whom he oversees). Watch:

This is the same Alejandro Mayorkas who claims the border is completely
secure. Now he’s saying he has 100% confidence in the director of the Secret
Service, three days after the Secret Service allowed the leading
presidential candidate to take a head-shot from a rifle while he delivered a
speech on stage. The only conceivable way you’d have “100 % confidence” in
this agency, and the people who lead it, is if you’re absolutely fine with
that outcome. At this point it’s not really a conspiracy theory to say that
the Biden administration apparently thinks Saturday’s assassination attempt
was acceptable. They’re coming right out and saying it to our faces. If it
was unacceptable, they would fire the people who allowed it to happen. But
they aren’t.

Saying you have 100% confidence in the Secret Service after an incident like
this is like looking out over the wreckage of a collapsed bridge and
declaring that you have a 100% confidence in the engineering team that
designed it. 100% confidence. Not even, like, 90% confidence, or 73%
confidence. Their utter and total and catastrophic failure has not lost them
even one percentage point of confidence, in your book.

And it’s not just the DHS secretary saying this. Last night, Joe Biden was
asked by Lester Holt about the Director of the Secret Service. He made it
clear he has no problems with the director’s performance. He also made it
clear he has no idea who the director is, because he said “I’ve heard from
him,” even though the director of the Secret Service is a woman. Watch:

So Biden may not be sure who the Director of the Secret Service is. But he’s
sure that he, or she, or whoever, is doing a great job — as evidenced by the
fact that her agents nearly got his chief political rival killed. And of
course, because no one in the Biden administration has any shame whatsoever,
the Secret Service director has said she has no intention of stepping aside.
It’s just like the pullout from Afghanistan, which directly resulted in the
deaths of several U.S. servicemembers. No one resigned after that debacle.
No one was fired. No one in the government seemed to care, frankly. And we’re
seeing that repeat after the single most significant security failure by the
Secret Service since the attempt on Ronald Reagan’s life. Actually it’s
worse than that. Based on everything we know now, we can say with a high
degree of confidence that this is the worst security failure by the Secret
Service in its history. But no one in any position of authority in the
agency or outside of it will be held accountable in any way whatsoever.

This is why our system of government has lost all the trust the public may
have once had in it. There’s no sense of accountability or responsibility.
If anything, these people are embracing their failures — almost as if they
wanted them to happen. That means we’ll never be told the truth about what
happened in Butler, Pennsylvania on Saturday. We’ll never be given the full
story of how it happened. Why this guy was allowed to do this. And who this
guy even is. And even if we are someday given all of this information, there
will be no reason for any of us to believe any of it.?

https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-official-story-on-trumps-shooting-makes-no-sense-at-all

shawn

2024-07-19 08:37:23 UTC

Post by Norm Chomsky
Seventy-two hours after an assassin shot and nearly killed Donald Trump in
Pennsylvania, here’s the official story so far: A random 20-year-old acting
completely alone walked within 150 yards of a presidential campaign rally
with a rifle, climbed onto a rooftop in full view of Secret Service snipers,
set up his shot and fired without anyone intervening and with no help from
anyone.
This 20-year-old is also so politically radical as to attempt an
assassination and yet not radical enough to have ever posted any political
writings or commentary on any social media site ever in his life. He also
wrote no manifesto and left behind no indication about why he did it. Even
after authorities gained access to his phone, they say they still have no
clue about his motivations. All we’re told is that, for some reason, he
obviously wanted Donald Trump dead. There’s just a handful of videos of the
shooter circulating, including one in which he makes some weird sexual joke,
and one in which he appears briefly in a Blackrock video featuring his high
school classroom. Other than that, it’s as if he never existed.

Actually, there is reports that he was depressed and before the
shooting looked up the future locations of both Biden and Trump. So it
seems like he may have just wanted to take out some famous politician
and Trump had the misfortune of being close by. So no big political
statement (hence no manifesto left behind) just one sad individual
that wanted to go out in a blaze of glory.

BTR1701

2024-07-19 18:41:23 UTC

Post by Norm Chomsky
Seventy-two hours after an assassin shot and nearly killed Donald Trump in
Pennsylvania, here's the official story so far: A random 20-year-old acting
completely alone walked within 150 yards of a presidential campaign rally
with a rifle, climbed onto a rooftop in full view of Secret Service snipers,
set up his shot and fired without anyone intervening and with no help from
anyone.
This 20-year-old is also so politically radical as to attempt an
assassination and yet not radical enough to have ever posted any political
writings or commentary on any social media site ever in his life. He also
wrote no manifesto and left behind no indication about why he did it. Even
after authorities gained access to his phone, they say they still have no
clue about his motivations. All we're told is that, for some reason, he
obviously wanted Donald Trump dead. There's just a handful of videos of the
shooter circulating, including one in which he makes some weird sexual joke,
and one in which he appears briefly in a Blackrock video featuring his high
school classroom. Other than that, it's as if he never existed.

Like Hinckley, who actually tried to shoot Jimmy Carter before he made
his attempt on Reagan. He flew to a Carter campaign site with his loaded
gun but gave up and left when he realized he couldn't penetrate security.

Hinckley just wanted to kill someone famous to impress Jodie Foster.
Republicans and Democrats didn't matter to him.

shawn

2024-07-19 22:15:13 UTC

Like Hinckley, who actually tried to shoot Jimmy Carter before he made
his attempt on Reagan. He flew to a Carter campaign site with his loaded
gun but gave up and left when he realized he couldn't penetrate security.
Hinckley just wanted to kill someone famous to impress Jodie Foster.
Republicans and Democrats didn't matter to him.

Which makes someone like that the most dangerous sort because there's
no grand scheme. No one likely to leak the info that security can pick
up on. Also no one worried about how to get away or making the sort of
plans an experienced person would make if planning to take out someone
like a President.

The Horny Goat

2024-07-21 16:20:00 UTC

On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 18:15:13 -0400, shawn

Post by shawn
Which makes someone like that the most dangerous sort because there's
no grand scheme. No one likely to leak the info that security can pick
up on. Also no one worried about how to get away or making the sort of
plans an experienced person would make if planning to take out someone
like a President.

What exactly do you mean by 'experienced' in this context? Something
like out of The Day of the Jackal?

shawn

2024-07-21 18:48:15 UTC

Post by The Horny Goat
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 18:15:13 -0400, shawn

What exactly do you mean by 'experienced' in this context? Something
like out of The Day of the Jackal?

Anyone who had (and had taken to heart) basic sniper training. So many
people in the military would qualify under that circumstance as
looking for a proper location for shooting AND worrying about how to
escape afterwards. This shooter only cared about killing Trump. What
happened afterwards clearly wasn't in his mind as looking at where he
was shooting from he was clearly either going to end dead or in jail.
There was no escape plan.

The Horny Goat

2024-07-21 16:18:43 UTC

As far as we can tell, this mans last and only political act, before
attempting to kill the Republican candidate, was to register as a
Republican. Oh and apparently, there were Trump signs outside of his parents

Which of course doesn't prove his political allegiance - I'm pretty
sure my daughter (age 36 and lives with me - and with my wife's
passing 2 years ago I am grateful to have her - our house is big
enough we don't have to be constantly together) hasn't voted my way in
her life.

Though I have never put a sign on my lawn in my life except for one
for a municipal election for a socialist lawyer who nonetheless does a
good job for his constituents - though I would never ever vote for him
at the federal or provincial level.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-07-23 17:46:22 UTC

Kimberly Cheatle has resigned as director of Secret Service. Democrats
had called for her resignation, especially Senator Dick Durbin.

Is this reform or must there be discipline and resignations upon anyone
above the person responsible for site preparation who had some
responsibility for plan approval?

Secret Service director steps down after assassination attempt against
ex-President Trump at rally
By COLLEEN LONG
AP
Updated 12:13 PM CDT, July 23, 2024
https://apnews.com/article/secret-service-director-trump-rally-8b1b13cece2ff25590c81093032dceb4

danny burstein

2024-07-23 17:56:02 UTC

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Kimberly Cheatle has resigned as director of Secret Service. Democrats
had called for her resignation, especially Senator Dick Durbin.
Is this reform or must there be discipline and resignations upon anyone
above the person responsible for site preparation who had some
responsibility for plan approval?

Let me know when Lloyd Bentson takes a hit
for the Waco Massacre.

--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
***@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

Adam H. Kerman

2024-07-23 18:21:41 UTC

Post by danny burstein

Let me know when Lloyd Bentson takes a hit
for the Waco Massacre.

He did. The problem was that Janet Reno didn't and remained arrogant.

Ubiquitous

2024-09-05 08:32:04 UTC

Whistleblowers have warned Congress that federal agents reassigned to
protective candidate details, including former President Donald Trump's, were
"egregiously under-prepared."

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) claimed in an X post on Tuesday that Homeland
Security personnel had been "thrown onto Trump's protective detail with
nothing more than a 2hr online training" at the July 13 campaign rally in
Butler, Pennsylvania, where a 20-year-old man attempted to assassinate the
former president.

During a Fox News interview, Hawley said, "Think about this: This former
president of the US...is sent out on stage, most of the people there are not
trained, they're not qualified. They only got a webinar training and even
that didn't work."

Hawley sent a letter to Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe on Tuesday
detailing new claims about Homeland Security Investigation (HSI) agents that
partner with the Secret Service. He said the recent allegations "suggest that
a significant number of personnel tasked with providing security for former
President Trump at the July 13 rally were egregiously under-prepared by the
Secret Service to carry out this mission."

"When Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents partner with the Secret
Service, they should be properly trained. New whistleblower allegations
contend that this isn't happening...," Hawley wrote.

NEW - My letter to Secret Service Director Rowe detailing new
whistleblower allegations that Homeland Security agents working
the Butler Trump rally received only "webinar" training beforehand
pic.twitter.com/KQZbgDf7Rs

-- Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) September 4, 2024

The Missouri Republican added that a whistleblower told him "that the only
training received by many HSI agents reassigned to work protective details is
a two-hour webinar on Microsoft Teams featuring pre-recorded videos."

"Imagine 1,000 people logging onto Microsoft Teams at the same time after
being informed at the last minute that everyone needed to login
individually," a whistleblower said, according to Hawley. "Once it got
rolling, the Secret Service instructor couldn't figure out how to get the
audio working on the prerecorded videos (which I'm told are the same videos
as last year). All told, they restarted the videos approximately six times
.... The content was not helpful."

The agents assigned to President Trump in Butler PA were pulled off
child exploitation cases and thrown onto Trump's protective detail
with nothing more than a 2hr online training. And we know this ONLY
because of brave whistleblowers pic.twitter.com/m8CY5eqmUl

-- Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) September 4, 2024

Hawley added in his letter that "these latest whistleblower allegations
contend HSI agents were pulled off child exploitation cases in order to serve
on protective details for which they were unprepared."

Tickets for "Am I Racist?" are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.

Since Trump was shot in the ear by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks at the
July 13 rally, the whistleblower told Hawley that there have been no security
training improvements.

"Nothing new, nothing improved since the assassination attempt on former
President Trump," the whistleblower said.

Hawley asked Rowe to provide details on how many HSI agents were present at
the July 13 rally, how many were only trained through the webinar, and to
provide specific curriculum and training materials. Lawmakers continue to
investigate the Secret Service's handling of the Butler rally as questions
remain about what caused the massive security failures.

--
Let's go Brandon!

BTR1701

2024-09-05 16:57:51 UTC

Post by Ubiquitous
Whistleblowers have warned Congress that federal agents reassigned to
protective candidate details, including former President Donald Trump's, were
"egregiously under-prepared."
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) claimed in an X post on Tuesday that Homeland
Security personnel had been "thrown onto Trump's protective detail with
nothing more than a 2hr online training" at the July 13 campaign rally in
Butler, Pennsylvania, where a 20-year-old man attempted to assassinate the
former president.
During a Fox News interview, Hawley said, "Think about this: This former
president of the US...is sent out on stage, most of the people there are not
trained, they're not qualified. They only got a webinar training and even
that didn't work."
Hawley sent a letter to Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe on Tuesday
detailing new claims about Homeland Security Investigation (HSI) agents that
partner with the Secret Service. He said the recent allegations "suggest that
a significant number of personnel tasked with providing security for former
President Trump at the July 13 rally were egregiously under-prepared by the
Secret Service to carry out this mission."

I always hated the fact that the HSI agents got the best posts when we used
them for big events, like the UN General Assembly in NYC. When we first
started using HSI to supplement our manpower during massive events like UNGA,
the State of the Union, the Inauguration, the political conventions, and the
Super Bowl, they were given basic outer perimeter duties precisely because
they didn't have full USSS training. But then they started complaining to
their bosses about how "boring" it was and how they never got to see any of
the cool stuff and they weren't going to volunteer for the gig anymore, so of
course USSS management caved and started putting USSS agents on the shitty
posts and giving the HSI folks slots in the inner perimeter and even on the
protective details themselves. It was insane and all because none of the
bosses could muster the cojones to tell a bunch of whiny HSI agents to shut
up, stop bitching, and do their jobs whether they thought it was "cool" or
not.

During the last campaign I worked (2016), whenever I was a site agent and got
my list of poststanders, I'd immediately cull out the HSI agents from the list
and put them on outer perimeter vehicle checkpoints. A few times I got
pushback from them, saying they'd been told they wouldn't be working outside
anymore. I told them they could either do the job they were assigned or I'd
arrange a flight for them back to their field office with a letter of
reprimand for their file.

Adam H. Kerman

2024-09-05 17:42:28 UTC

Let's properly cite for the article Ubi the shithead plagarized.

Most Agents Assigned To Protect Trump At Butler Rally Only Received '2
Hour Online Training,' Sen. Hawley Says
By Leif Le Mahieu
The Daily Wire
Sep 4, 2024
https://www.dailywire.com/news/most-agents-assigned-to-protect-trump-at-butler-rally-only-received-2-hour-online-training-sen-hawley-says

Post by Ubiquitous
Whistleblowers have warned Congress that federal agents reassigned to
protective candidate details, including former President Donald Trump's,
were "egregiously under-prepared."
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) claimed in an X post on Tuesday that Homeland
Security personnel had been "thrown onto Trump's protective detail with
nothing more than a 2hr online training" at the July 13 campaign rally in
Butler, Pennsylvania, where a 20-year-old man attempted to assassinate the
former president.
During a Fox News interview, Hawley said, "Think about this: This former
president of the US...is sent out on stage, most of the people there are not
trained, they're not qualified. They only got a webinar training and even
that didn't work."
Hawley sent a letter to Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe
on Tuesday detailing new claims about Homeland Security Investigation
(HSI) agents that partner with the Secret Service. He said the recent
allegations "suggest that a significant number of personnel tasked
with providing security for former President Trump at the July 13
rally were egregiously under-prepared by the Secret Service to carry
out this mission."

I always hated the fact that the HSI agents got the best posts when we used
them for big events, like the UN General Assembly in NYC. When we first
started using HSI to supplement our manpower during massive events like UNGA,
the State of the Union, the Inauguration, the political conventions, and the
Super Bowl, they were given basic outer perimeter duties precisely because
they didn't have full USSS training. But then they started complaining to
their bosses about how "boring" it was and how they never got to see any of
the cool stuff and they weren't going to volunteer for the gig anymore, so of
course USSS management caved and started putting USSS agents on the shitty
posts and giving the HSI folks slots in the inner perimeter and even on the
protective details themselves. It was insane and all because none of the
bosses could muster the cojones to tell a bunch of whiny HSI agents to shut
up, stop bitching, and do their jobs whether they thought it was "cool" or
not.
During the last campaign I worked (2016), whenever I was a site agent and got
my list of poststanders, I'd immediately cull out the HSI agents from the list
and put them on outer perimeter vehicle checkpoints. A few times I got
pushback from them, saying they'd been told they wouldn't be working outside
anymore. I told them they could either do the job they were assigned or I'd
arrange a flight for them back to their field office with a letter of
reprimand for their file.

I had no idea.

Are HSI agents CID for Customs and immigration law enforcement, or are
they something else? I am never sure what some parts of DHS do.

shawn

2024-09-05 18:37:18 UTC

On Thu, 5 Sep 2024 17:42:28 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Let's properly cite for the article Ubi the shithead plagarized.
Most Agents Assigned To Protect Trump At Butler Rally Only Received '2
Hour Online Training,' Sen. Hawley Says
By Leif Le Mahieu
The Daily Wire
Sep 4, 2024
https://www.dailywire.com/news/most-agents-assigned-to-protect-trump-at-butler-rally-only-received-2-hour-online-training-sen-hawley-says

Post by Ubiquitous
Whistleblowers have warned Congress that federal agents reassigned to
protective candidate details, including former President Donald Trump's,
were "egregiously under-prepared."
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) claimed in an X post on Tuesday that Homeland
Security personnel had been "thrown onto Trump's protective detail with
nothing more than a 2hr online training" at the July 13 campaign rally in
Butler, Pennsylvania, where a 20-year-old man attempted to assassinate the
former president.
During a Fox News interview, Hawley said, "Think about this: This former
president of the US...is sent out on stage, most of the people there are not
trained, they're not qualified. They only got a webinar training and even
that didn't work."
Hawley sent a letter to Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe
on Tuesday detailing new claims about Homeland Security Investigation
(HSI) agents that partner with the Secret Service. He said the recent
allegations "suggest that a significant number of personnel tasked
with providing security for former President Trump at the July 13
rally were egregiously under-prepared by the Secret Service to carry
out this mission."

That makes no sense at all. Clearly you would want the best trained
people on the inner perimeter precisely because that is the most
sensitive area. As for the HSI agents I've never heard of people
getting that option to opt out of distasteful work unless they were
buddy-buddy with the management. Given we are talking about at least
tens of agents that buddy-buddy relationship shouldn't be an issue so
they can either do the job they are assigned or they can go ask if
their next customer wants fries with their order.

Post by BTR1701
During the last campaign I worked (2016), whenever I was a site agent and got
my list of poststanders, I'd immediately cull out the HSI agents from the list
and put them on outer perimeter vehicle checkpoints. A few times I got
pushback from them, saying they'd been told they wouldn't be working outside
anymore. I told them they could either do the job they were assigned or I'd
arrange a flight for them back to their field office with a letter of
reprimand for their file.

I had no idea.
Are HSI agents CID for Customs and immigration law enforcement, or are
they something else? I am never sure what some parts of DHS do.

BTR1701

2024-09-05 19:16:02 UTC