Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Trying to imagine what instructions were given to these 105 )

---

Shoot first, let God sort'em out!

boognish_bear said:

---

---

"people talk"

when you have a lot of ears deployed around, you hear a lot of things. when those things concern mundane matters, you can pick & choose to report what seems most concrete. But sometimes, when the information is inflammatory, involving things like regime change, terror attacks, war plans, etc......you just can't sit on them even if you are skeptical how closely they hew to reality.

In an average Friday night in an African capital, there are hundreds of bars full of thousands of drunk soldiers and policemen who as the night wears on start talking ever more boldly about what they're gonna do, by God! And if you have good sources. You hear a lot of that kinda stuff the following week. But how many of them really reflect a sober, focused, well-planned plot? Answer: exceedingly few. But then, one night in Liberia, just such drunken revelry was occurring in a bar where enlisted men were grousing about one President Tolbert. Then, a rumor flew thru town that Bacchus Matthews (a leading political opposionist in jail at that time) was going to be executed at dawn the following morning. The enlisted men raced outside, commandeered a couple of taxis, and headed off to the Presidential palace....to save Bacchus!. They rammed one of the taxis into the gate and started shooting. All the defenders at the Palace evaporated....under desks, into closets, over the back fence, etc...... The insurgent NCOs walked in the front door, took the elevator up to the top floor to the Presidential Suite and shot Tolbert dead in his pajamas.

There was no plan to execute Matthews. It was just a wild-assed rumor. But rumors exist. They are part of the cocktail of life, often as important as fact. Sometimes moreso. This one changed history.

Was there a "plot?"
Nope.
But regime change happened anyway.

Samuel Kanyon Doe just happened to be the senior NCO present in the group. so he became the new President.

I liked Bacchus. Presidential in demeanor. Intelligent. Principled. Enough so that it frustrated his chances to rule. But he died at home in bed, something not a lot of 3rd world politicians can boast. Unlike most leaders of his day, he had a decidedly positive impact on his country.

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

How did the shooter KNOW there would be a ladder available at this building ?

Come on people.

---

He brought it with him.

---

So this goofus brings a ladder and a rifle and magically knows the security parameter depth, along with which building would provide the easy 130 yard shot .
And he did this all completely unaided
Of course, who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Sure man, I'm running a 2 for 1 special on tin foil hats. Let me know how many you need.

---

Well this clever response certainly explains all the questions involved on the attempted murder of an ex president.

---

don't overthink it.

The building the sniper used was the obvious (i.e. only) choice for a sniper to use within practical ranges of the stage. I suspect we will see the following:
-a) the Secret Service site survey will have acknowledged that the building was a threat, but did not assess it needed to be inside the SS controlled perimeter. (bad decision).
-b) placing the building outside of the SS perimeter delegated defense of the building to local LE.
-c) SS did not mandate how the LE perimeter (the building) was to be defended.
-d) local LE did an inadequate survey of its own area.
-e) local LE assumed that occupying the inside of the building as its HQ was tantamount to defense of the entire building.
-f) ergo local LE did not station officers on the roof (assuming occupancy of the building = occupancy of the roof.)

Resource constraints could have significantly impacted analysis involved in step A. SS could have made that template work IF it had mandated protocols inside the local LE area (i.e. demanding a police presence on the rooftop). ONE COP WITH A SIDEARM on that roof and the situation totally changes. Either the shooter sees the deterrence and withdraws, or initiates a firefight to seize the position. In the latter scenario, the firefight itself illuminates the threat and Trump is whisked away safely.

*inadequate site survey
*inadequate site plan
*inadequate supervision of areas/responsibilities delegated to local LE

It was a multi-step failure. But just one cop sitting on the roof of that building would have saved the day.

---

Let's not overthink this in either direction.

Raid Trumps house with the FBI.
Adjust state laws to sue Trump for nothing.
Retroactively inflate state laws to illegally convict Trump


' put a bullseye on him '


From the President of the United States

---

Shooter had assistance.

---

I am starting to think you have a point. He had NO social media footprint, nothing on his phone and nothing to indicate motive. The guy was a ghost?

---

"Starting to"? It should have been a serious consideration by any reasonably aware person from the get go as soon as the first facts were in.

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

How did the shooter KNOW there would be a ladder available at this building ?

Come on people.

---

He brought it with him.

---

So this goofus brings a ladder and a rifle and magically knows the security parameter depth, along with which building would provide the easy 130 yard shot .
And he did this all completely unaided
Of course, who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Sure man, I'm running a 2 for 1 special on tin foil hats. Let me know how many you need.

---

Well this clever response certainly explains all the questions involved on the attempted murder of an ex president.

---

don't overthink it.

The building the sniper used was the obvious (i.e. only) choice for a sniper to use within practical ranges of the stage. I suspect we will see the following:
-a) the Secret Service site survey will have acknowledged that the building was a threat, but did not assess it needed to be inside the SS controlled perimeter. (bad decision).
-b) placing the building outside of the SS perimeter delegated defense of the building to local LE.
-c) SS did not mandate how the LE perimeter (the building) was to be defended.
-d) local LE did an inadequate survey of its own area.
-e) local LE assumed that occupying the inside of the building as its HQ was tantamount to defense of the entire building.
-f) ergo local LE did not station officers on the roof (assuming occupancy of the building = occupancy of the roof.)

Resource constraints could have significantly impacted analysis involved in step A. SS could have made that template work IF it had mandated protocols inside the local LE area (i.e. demanding a police presence on the rooftop). ONE COP WITH A SIDEARM on that roof and the situation totally changes. Either the shooter sees the deterrence and withdraws, or initiates a firefight to seize the position. In the latter scenario, the firefight itself illuminates the threat and Trump is whisked away safely.

*inadequate site survey
*inadequate site plan
*inadequate supervision of areas/responsibilities delegated to local LE

It was a multi-step failure. But just one cop sitting on the roof of that building would have saved the day.

---

Let's not overthink this in either direction.

Raid Trumps house with the FBI.
Adjust state laws to sue Trump for nothing.
Retroactively inflate state laws to illegally convict Trump


' put a bullseye on him '


From the President of the United States

---

Shooter had assistance.

---

I am starting to think you have a point. He had NO social media footprint, nothing on his phone and nothing to indicate motive. The guy was a ghost?

---

"Starting to"? It should have been a serious consideration by any reasonably aware person from the get go as soon as the first facts were in.

---

Lone wolf is the toughest to catch. Could he slip through? If he just did it, with no pre-publicity? He was using an easy weapon to get and the choice of the AR for sniping? Novice that just showed up and squeezed off 5 rounds? Sure.

A 20 year old with no social media footprint? Phone the CIA cracked that showed nothing? Did he have a rotary phone too? That is odd and highly unlikely.

---

On the only building near Trump with a clear line of sight, easy enough distance for amateurs, yet completely unguarded by the most expert security agency in the world, even while his presence was witnessed and reported? And with snipers aware of him, trained on him, but not immediately shielding Trump and taking him off stage?

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Trying to imagine what instructions were given to these 105 )

---

Trying to imagine if Austin PD officers were ever trained to do anything but look the other way.

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

How did the shooter KNOW there would be a ladder available at this building ?

Come on people.

---

He brought it with him.

---

So this goofus brings a ladder and a rifle and magically knows the security parameter depth, along with which building would provide the easy 130 yard shot .
And he did this all completely unaided
Of course, who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Sure man, I'm running a 2 for 1 special on tin foil hats. Let me know how many you need.

---

Well this clever response certainly explains all the questions involved on the attempted murder of an ex president.

---

don't overthink it.

The building the sniper used was the obvious (i.e. only) choice for a sniper to use within practical ranges of the stage. I suspect we will see the following:
-a) the Secret Service site survey will have acknowledged that the building was a threat, but did not assess it needed to be inside the SS controlled perimeter. (bad decision).
-b) placing the building outside of the SS perimeter delegated defense of the building to local LE.
-c) SS did not mandate how the LE perimeter (the building) was to be defended.
-d) local LE did an inadequate survey of its own area.
-e) local LE assumed that occupying the inside of the building as its HQ was tantamount to defense of the entire building.
-f) ergo local LE did not station officers on the roof (assuming occupancy of the building = occupancy of the roof.)

Resource constraints could have significantly impacted analysis involved in step A. SS could have made that template work IF it had mandated protocols inside the local LE area (i.e. demanding a police presence on the rooftop). ONE COP WITH A SIDEARM on that roof and the situation totally changes. Either the shooter sees the deterrence and withdraws, or initiates a firefight to seize the position. In the latter scenario, the firefight itself illuminates the threat and Trump is whisked away safely.

*inadequate site survey
*inadequate site plan
*inadequate supervision of areas/responsibilities delegated to local LE

It was a multi-step failure. But just one cop sitting on the roof of that building would have saved the day.

---

Let's not overthink this in either direction.

Raid Trumps house with the FBI.
Adjust state laws to sue Trump for nothing.
Retroactively inflate state laws to illegally convict Trump


' put a bullseye on him '


From the President of the United States

---

Shooter had assistance.

---

I am starting to think you have a point. He had NO social media footprint, nothing on his phone and nothing to indicate motive. The guy was a ghost?

---

"Starting to"? It should have been a serious consideration by any reasonably aware person from the get go as soon as the first facts were in.

---

Lone wolf is the toughest to catch. Could he slip through? If he just did it, with no pre-publicity? He was using an easy weapon to get and the choice of the AR for sniping? Novice that just showed up and squeezed off 5 rounds? Sure.

A 20 year old with no social media footprint? Phone the CIA cracked that showed nothing? Did he have a rotary phone too? That is odd and highly unlikely.

---

On the only building near Trump with a clear line of sight, easy enough distance for amateurs, yet completely unguarded by the most expert security agency in the world, even while his presence was witnessed and reported? And with snipers aware of him, trained on him, but not immediately shielding Trump and taking him off stage?

---

Yeah, the whole thing stinks. Why did the leading nominee for the Presidency have the B team of the SS?

---

Yeah, it stunk and warranted suspicion from the very beginning, that's my point.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

How did the shooter KNOW there would be a ladder available at this building ?

Come on people.

---

He brought it with him.

---

So this goofus brings a ladder and a rifle and magically knows the security parameter depth, along with which building would provide the easy 130 yard shot .
And he did this all completely unaided
Of course, who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Sure man, I'm running a 2 for 1 special on tin foil hats. Let me know how many you need.

---

Well this clever response certainly explains all the questions involved on the attempted murder of an ex president.

---

don't overthink it.

The building the sniper used was the obvious (i.e. only) choice for a sniper to use within practical ranges of the stage. I suspect we will see the following:
-a) the Secret Service site survey will have acknowledged that the building was a threat, but did not assess it needed to be inside the SS controlled perimeter. (bad decision).
-b) placing the building outside of the SS perimeter delegated defense of the building to local LE.
-c) SS did not mandate how the LE perimeter (the building) was to be defended.
-d) local LE did an inadequate survey of its own area.
-e) local LE assumed that occupying the inside of the building as its HQ was tantamount to defense of the entire building.
-f) ergo local LE did not station officers on the roof (assuming occupancy of the building = occupancy of the roof.)

Resource constraints could have significantly impacted analysis involved in step A. SS could have made that template work IF it had mandated protocols inside the local LE area (i.e. demanding a police presence on the rooftop). ONE COP WITH A SIDEARM on that roof and the situation totally changes. Either the shooter sees the deterrence and withdraws, or initiates a firefight to seize the position. In the latter scenario, the firefight itself illuminates the threat and Trump is whisked away safely.

*inadequate site survey
*inadequate site plan
*inadequate supervision of areas/responsibilities delegated to local LE

It was a multi-step failure. But just one cop sitting on the roof of that building would have saved the day.

---

Let's not overthink this in either direction.

Raid Trumps house with the FBI.
Adjust state laws to sue Trump for nothing.
Retroactively inflate state laws to illegally convict Trump


' put a bullseye on him '


From the President of the United States

---

Shooter had assistance.

---

I am starting to think you have a point. He had NO social media footprint, nothing on his phone and nothing to indicate motive. The guy was a ghost?

---

"Starting to"? It should have been a serious consideration by any reasonably aware person from the get go as soon as the first facts were in.

---

Lone wolf is the toughest to catch. Could he slip through? If he just did it, with no pre-publicity? He was using an easy weapon to get and the choice of the AR for sniping? Novice that just showed up and squeezed off 5 rounds? Sure.

A 20 year old with no social media footprint? Phone the CIA cracked that showed nothing? Did he have a rotary phone too? That is odd and highly unlikely.

---

On the only building near Trump with a clear line of sight, easy enough distance for amateurs, yet completely unguarded by the most expert security agency in the world, even while his presence was witnessed and reported? And with snipers aware of him, trained on him, but not immediately shielding Trump and taking him off stage?

---

Yeah, the whole thing stinks. Why did the leading nominee for the Presidency have the B team of the SS?

---

Yeah, it stunk and warranted suspicion from the very beginning, that's my point.

---

The A team was busy protecting President Biden, Mrs Biden, the VP, the VP's husband, Obama, Mrs Obama and the daughters, George Bush, Mrs Bush, Congressional officials, Secret Service boss, ... . Give them a break; they are busy with important assignments.

The FBI Just Released More Details Regarding the Trump Assassin

• he went to a shooting range where he was a member, and practiced firing, the day before

• the day of the rally, Crooks went to a Home Depot and purchased a five-foot ladder
—— does that look like a 5ft ladder… pic.twitter.com/1ZF65bJbiI

— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) July 16, 2024

boognish_bear said:

---

The FBI Just Released More Details Regarding the Trump Assassin

• he went to a shooting range where he was a member, and practiced firing, the day before

• the day of the rally, Crooks went to a Home Depot and purchased a five-foot ladder
—— does that look like a 5ft ladder… pic.twitter.com/1ZF65bJbiI

— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) July 16, 2024

---

thats a 10 foot and it may have been put there by the team that was in the building

57Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

How did the shooter KNOW there would be a ladder available at this building ?

Come on people.

---

He brought it with him.

---

So this goofus brings a ladder and a rifle and magically knows the security parameter depth, along with which building would provide the easy 130 yard shot .
And he did this all completely unaided
Of course, who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Sure man, I'm running a 2 for 1 special on tin foil hats. Let me know how many you need.

---

Well this clever response certainly explains all the questions involved on the attempted murder of an ex president.

---

don't overthink it.

The building the sniper used was the obvious (i.e. only) choice for a sniper to use within practical ranges of the stage. I suspect we will see the following:
-a) the Secret Service site survey will have acknowledged that the building was a threat, but did not assess it needed to be inside the SS controlled perimeter. (bad decision).
-b) placing the building outside of the SS perimeter delegated defense of the building to local LE.
-c) SS did not mandate how the LE perimeter (the building) was to be defended.
-d) local LE did an inadequate survey of its own area.
-e) local LE assumed that occupying the inside of the building as its HQ was tantamount to defense of the entire building.
-f) ergo local LE did not station officers on the roof (assuming occupancy of the building = occupancy of the roof.)

Resource constraints could have significantly impacted analysis involved in step A. SS could have made that template work IF it had mandated protocols inside the local LE area (i.e. demanding a police presence on the rooftop). ONE COP WITH A SIDEARM on that roof and the situation totally changes. Either the shooter sees the deterrence and withdraws, or initiates a firefight to seize the position. In the latter scenario, the firefight itself illuminates the threat and Trump is whisked away safely.

*inadequate site survey
*inadequate site plan
*inadequate supervision of areas/responsibilities delegated to local LE

It was a multi-step failure. But just one cop sitting on the roof of that building would have saved the day.

---

Let's not overthink this in either direction.

Raid Trumps house with the FBI.
Adjust state laws to sue Trump for nothing.
Retroactively inflate state laws to illegally convict Trump


' put a bullseye on him '


From the President of the United States

---

Shooter had assistance.

---

I am starting to think you have a point. He had NO social media footprint, nothing on his phone and nothing to indicate motive. The guy was a ghost?

---

"Starting to"? It should have been a serious consideration by any reasonably aware person from the get go as soon as the first facts were in.

---

Lone wolf is the toughest to catch. Could he slip through? If he just did it, with no pre-publicity? He was using an easy weapon to get and the choice of the AR for sniping? Novice that just showed up and squeezed off 5 rounds? Sure.

A 20 year old with no social media footprint? Phone the CIA cracked that showed nothing? Did he have a rotary phone too? That is odd and highly unlikely.

---

On the only building near Trump with a clear line of sight, easy enough distance for amateurs, yet completely unguarded by the most expert security agency in the world, even while his presence was witnessed and reported? And with snipers aware of him, trained on him, but not immediately shielding Trump and taking him off stage?

---

Yeah, the whole thing stinks. Why did the leading nominee for the Presidency have the B team of the SS?

---

Yeah, it stunk and warranted suspicion from the very beginning, that's my point.

---

The A team was busy protecting President Biden, Mrs Biden, the VP, the VP's husband, Obama, Mrs Obama and the daughters, George Bush, Mrs Bush, Congressional officials, Secret Service boss, ... . Give them a break; they are busy with important assignments.

---

Yeah, the persumtive Nominee that is on the election trail rates lower...

You mean the soft spoken guy who taunts noone?

Yeah, him....

Jack Bauer said:

---

Just walking around with an AR-15 and a ladder....not suspicious at all.

---

i might have done that today at the jobsite..

4th and Inches said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Just walking around with an AR-15 and a ladder....not suspicious at all.

---

i might have done that today at the jobsite..

---

You working with Jimmy Carter again at Habitat for Humanity?

Assassin said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Just walking around with an AR-15 and a ladder....not suspicious at all.

---

i might have done that today at the jobsite..

---

You working with Jimmy Carter again at Habitat for Humanity?

---

last time I worked for Habitat, we had to have volunteers watch the cars and trailer. That neighborhood was rough.

4th and Inches said:

---

Assassin said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Just walking around with an AR-15 and a ladder....not suspicious at all.

---

i might have done that today at the jobsite..

---

You working with Jimmy Carter again at Habitat for Humanity?

---

last time I worked for Habitat, we had to have volunteers watch the cars and trailer. That neighborhood was rough.

---

Did three homes in Dallas for them. Met Jimmy Carter. I was expecting this sweet old fella that we all saw on TV. That was one of the nastiest folks ever. And at all three homes, different dates. I knew he was our worst POTUS, but also one of the worst people, not so much!

Jack Bauer said:

---

Just walking around with an AR-15 and a ladder....not suspicious at all.

---

>walked 1 mile to the Trump rally with a rifle and ladder in hand
In 90+ degree weather.

— Martin (@MartinRJ89) July 16, 2024

NOW: "Justice For Samuel Sharpe!" march begins in Milwaukee after a man was shot by Columbus Ohio Police Officer near RNC pic.twitter.com/wXnnxMYPaL

— Oliya Scootercaster 🛴 (@ScooterCasterNY) July 17, 2024

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

How did the shooter KNOW there would be a ladder available at this building ?

Come on people.

---

He brought it with him.

---

So this goofus brings a ladder and a rifle and magically knows the security parameter depth, along with which building would provide the easy 130 yard shot .
And he did this all completely unaided
Of course, who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Sure man, I'm running a 2 for 1 special on tin foil hats. Let me know how many you need.

---

Well this clever response certainly explains all the questions involved on the attempted murder of an ex president.

---

don't overthink it.

The building the sniper used was the obvious (i.e. only) choice for a sniper to use within practical ranges of the stage. I suspect we will see the following:
-a) the Secret Service site survey will have acknowledged that the building was a threat, but did not assess it needed to be inside the SS controlled perimeter. (bad decision).
-b) placing the building outside of the SS perimeter delegated defense of the building to local LE.
-c) SS did not mandate how the LE perimeter (the building) was to be defended.
-d) local LE did an inadequate survey of its own area.
-e) local LE assumed that occupying the inside of the building as its HQ was tantamount to defense of the entire building.
-f) ergo local LE did not station officers on the roof (assuming occupancy of the building = occupancy of the roof.)

Resource constraints could have significantly impacted analysis involved in step A. SS could have made that template work IF it had mandated protocols inside the local LE area (i.e. demanding a police presence on the rooftop). ONE COP WITH A SIDEARM on that roof and the situation totally changes. Either the shooter sees the deterrence and withdraws, or initiates a firefight to seize the position. In the latter scenario, the firefight itself illuminates the threat and Trump is whisked away safely.

*inadequate site survey
*inadequate site plan
*inadequate supervision of areas/responsibilities delegated to local LE

It was a multi-step failure. But just one cop sitting on the roof of that building would have saved the day.

---

Let's not overthink this in either direction.

Raid Trumps house with the FBI.
Adjust state laws to sue Trump for nothing.
Retroactively inflate state laws to illegally convict Trump


' put a bullseye on him '


From the President of the United States

---

Shooter had assistance.

---

I am starting to think you have a point. He had NO social media footprint, nothing on his phone and nothing to indicate motive. The guy was a ghost?

---

"Starting to"? It should have been a serious consideration by any reasonably aware person from the get go as soon as the first facts were in.

---

Lone wolf is the toughest to catch. Could he slip through? If he just did it, with no pre-publicity? He was using an easy weapon to get and the choice of the AR for sniping? Novice that just showed up and squeezed off 5 rounds? Sure.

A 20 year old with no social media footprint? Phone the CIA cracked that showed nothing? Did he have a rotary phone too? That is odd and highly unlikely.

---

On the only building near Trump with a clear line of sight, easy enough distance for amateurs, yet completely unguarded by the most expert security agency in the world, even while his presence was witnessed and reported? And with snipers aware of him, trained on him, but not immediately shielding Trump and taking him off stage?

---

Yeah, the whole thing stinks. Why did the leading nominee for the Presidency have the B team of the SS?

---

That's the real question. People weren't taking their jobs seriously. They thought they would be herding boomers around a field. Meanwhile nerd boy showed up looking to make a name for himself.

KaiBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

How did the shooter KNOW there would be a ladder available at this building ?

Come on people.

---

He brought it with him.

---

So this goofus brings a ladder and a rifle and magically knows the security parameter depth, along with which building would provide the easy 130 yard shot .
And he did this all completely unaided
Of course, who could possibly doubt it ?

---

Sure man, I'm running a 2 for 1 special on tin foil hats. Let me know how many you need.

---

Well this clever response certainly explains all the questions involved on the attempted murder of an ex president.

---

don't overthink it.

The building the sniper used was the obvious (i.e. only) choice for a sniper to use within practical ranges of the stage. I suspect we will see the following:
-a) the Secret Service site survey will have acknowledged that the building was a threat, but did not assess it needed to be inside the SS controlled perimeter. (bad decision).
-b) placing the building outside of the SS perimeter delegated defense of the building to local LE.
-c) SS did not mandate how the LE perimeter (the building) was to be defended.
-d) local LE did an inadequate survey of its own area.
-e) local LE assumed that occupying the inside of the building as its HQ was tantamount to defense of the entire building.
-f) ergo local LE did not station officers on the roof (assuming occupancy of the building = occupancy of the roof.)

Resource constraints could have significantly impacted analysis involved in step A. SS could have made that template work IF it had mandated protocols inside the local LE area (i.e. demanding a police presence on the rooftop). ONE COP WITH A SIDEARM on that roof and the situation totally changes. Either the shooter sees the deterrence and withdraws, or initiates a firefight to seize the position. In the latter scenario, the firefight itself illuminates the threat and Trump is whisked away safely.

*inadequate site survey
*inadequate site plan
*inadequate supervision of areas/responsibilities delegated to local LE

It was a multi-step failure. But just one cop sitting on the roof of that building would have saved the day.

---

Let's not overthink this in either direction.

Raid Trumps house with the FBI.
Adjust state laws to sue Trump for nothing.
Retroactively inflate state laws to illegally convict Trump


' put a bullseye on him '


From the President of the United States

---

Shooter had assistance.

---

I am starting to think you have a point. He had NO social media footprint, nothing on his phone and nothing to indicate motive. The guy was a ghost?

---

"Starting to"? It should have been a serious consideration by any reasonably aware person from the get go as soon as the first facts were in.

---

Lone wolf is the toughest to catch. Could he slip through? If he just did it, with no pre-publicity? He was using an easy weapon to get and the choice of the AR for sniping? Novice that just showed up and squeezed off 5 rounds? Sure.

A 20 year old with no social media footprint? Phone the CIA cracked that showed nothing? Did he have a rotary phone too? That is odd and highly unlikely.

---

Zero social media footprint
Knows the depth of SS protection
Managed to utilize a ladder and a rifle without interference.
No security on the roof because it was too steep ?


Reminds meet how Epstein's guards magically disappeared the night of his 'suicide'.

---

There are some quizzical things that happened. Will be interesting to see what the actual investigations turn up. The time of the Warren Commission was much different than today, people and the news didn't ask the questions and have the access they have now.

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

Why are people purposefully getting lost in the weeds?

1) a gunman tried to assassinate a former President who is a major party candidate for President.

2) he came very close to succeeding.

3) an innocent bystander was killed.

4) within 24 hour two of the three legacy networks have already begun a Blame the Victim campaign.

The gunman's ability, divine intervention, etc. are simply meaningless sideshows.

---

Claiming a candidate is God's chosen is not meaningless, it really works. Spinning this for max effect is all these political nutjobs know.

---

So only one side has nut jobs? Seems like both sides are well supplied.

---

Where did I mention one side?

---

Your quoted comment literally gives one example for one side of the political divide.

---

There are many others, you are correct.

boognish_bear said:

---

pic.twitter.com/3YqVrLSY8l

— G (@stevensongs) July 16, 2024

---

It seems the sloped roof obscured the sniper teams' view of Crooks

A Washington Post analysis, based on more than 40 videos and photos, as well as satellite imagery and terrain analysis used to build a 3D model examining the rally site and shooter's position, found that the two Secret Service countersniper teams may have initially been hindered in their ability to see the shooter as he crawled up the roof due to its slanted sides. Trees near the rally likely played a part in obscuring the shooter from at least one teamassigned to detect and neutralize would-be snipers.
The Post's assessments were reviewed and corroborated by three former law enforcement officials, including two retired snipers and a former Secret Service agent, as well as a former marine sniper.
The Post's 3D model established that both units may have been hampered by the pitch of the building's roof where Crooks was found, which rises roughly 3.5 ft from its exterior walls to its peak. According to the analysis, which placed a camera at the eye view of the teams, Crooks would likely not have been visible as he crawled up the roof to take his final shooting position. The Post's reconstruction shows that the northernmost Secret Service countersniper team closest to the suspect slightly more than 400 feet away and atop an approximately 23 foot tall barn may have further struggled to see him because of two trees located between them.
The second countersniper team, located roughly 550 feet from the shooter, while farther away, could have had a less obstructed view, according to The Post's reconstruction, because they were positioned slightly to the west and the trees may not have been in their line of sight.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2024/trump-rally-shooting-maps-secret-service-analysis/?itid=hp-top-table-main_p001_f009

FLBear5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

pic.twitter.com/3YqVrLSY8l

— G (@stevensongs) July 16, 2024

---

It seems the sloped roof obscured the sniper teams' view of Crooks

A Washington Post analysis, based on more than 40 videos and photos, as well as satellite imagery and terrain analysis used to build a 3D model examining the rally site and shooter's position, found that the two Secret Service countersniper teams may have initially been hindered in their ability to see the shooter as he crawled up the roof due to its slanted sides. Trees near the rally likely played a part in obscuring the shooter from at least one teamassigned to detect and neutralize would-be snipers.
The Post's assessments were reviewed and corroborated by three former law enforcement officials, including two retired snipers and a former Secret Service agent, as well as a former marine sniper.
The Post's 3D model established that both units may have been hampered by the pitch of the building's roof where Crooks was found, which rises roughly 3.5 ft from its exterior walls to its peak. According to the analysis, which placed a camera at the eye view of the teams, Crooks would likely not have been visible as he crawled up the roof to take his final shooting position. The Post's reconstruction shows that the northernmost Secret Service countersniper team closest to the suspect slightly more than 400 feet away and atop an approximately 23 foot tall barn may have further struggled to see him because of two trees located between them.
The second countersniper team, located roughly 550 feet from the shooter, while farther away, could have had a less obstructed view, according to The Post's reconstruction, because they were positioned slightly to the west and the trees may not have been in their line of sight.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2024/trump-rally-shooting-maps-secret-service-analysis/?itid=hp-top-table-main_p001_f009

---

Ok, but usually wouldn't you block off an area that has no eyeballs on? Or, reposition one of the other anti-sniper teams to cover it? Leaving it dark? That is not SS level, hell it is not Brigade level for a TOC! Who did the preliminary work on this?

I am no expert, but this seems very unusual. Or, complacency. Another ho-hum rally and just go through the motions.

---

Outside the perimeter means outside the primary barricaded area. From what I've read this was an open patrolled area local LEO was responsible for, and might have even been a rest area for the officers.

Poor planning. Poor execution of duty. Poor communication. Poor coordination. Bad outcome and amazing it wasn't worse. People need to be held accountable.