Secret Service under fire
-
It does not seem likely that that kid would become involved in a serious conspiracy to do serious things in this world. It is more likely that, in fact, he learned how to build that bomb by himself on the internet, and that he “snuck past” our crack secret service to take his shots at Trump.
-
-
According to an attorney who specializes in self-defense, there's no excuse for the delay in taking out the alleged assassin.
"The law allows for them to use deadly force in the defense of the President or any other innocent person the moment they reasonably perceive an imminent deadly force threat to that innocent person. That means they don't have to wait for a shot to be fired by the bad guy first, they don't have to be certain he's a bad guy. It could be wrong, it just has to be reasonably perceived as a deadly threat."
Link to videoGo to 3:40.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
You know, I kinda suspect that the secret service saw this geeky little kid, acting as incompetent as hell, trying to get through security with a range finder, crawling on the ground, and all the other shit, and thought it was a joke or thought the kid couldn’t pose a real threat.
-
According to an attorney who specializes in self-defense, there's no excuse for the delay in taking out the alleged assassin.
"The law allows for them to use deadly force in the defense of the President or any other innocent person the moment they reasonably perceive an imminent deadly force threat to that innocent person. That means they don't have to wait for a shot to be fired by the bad guy first, they don't have to be certain he's a bad guy. It could be wrong, it just has to be reasonably perceived as a deadly threat."
Link to videoGo to 3:40.
@George-K said in Secret Service under fire:
According to an attorney who specializes in self-defense, there's no excuse for the delay in taking out the alleged assassin.
"The law allows for them to use deadly force in the defense of the President or any other innocent person the moment they reasonably perceive an imminent deadly force threat to that innocent person. That means they don't have to wait for a shot to be fired by the bad guy first, they don't have to be certain he's a bad guy. It could be wrong, it just has to be reasonably perceived as a deadly threat."
Link to videoGo to 3:40.
I don’t know about you, but I’d see a guy with a rifle trying to get to a place to fire as an imminent threat.
-
It might have been a miracle that DJT turned his head when and how he did, but there was a veritable witches brew of errors and mistakes for the attempt to have gotten as far as it did.
-
Yet, Trump stood up for the Secret Service agents last night.
-
@Jolly said in Secret Service under fire:
Yet, Trump stood up for the Secret Service agents last night.
The smart move.
-
Bongino said right after the assassination attempt, that his sources in the department told him they had to borrow agents from other agencies.
-
Bongino said right after the assassination attempt, that his sources in the department told him they had to borrow agents from other agencies.
@Jolly said in Secret Service under fire:
Bongino said right after the assassination attempt, that his sources in the department told him they had to borrow agents from other agencies.
I would guess that desk-riders are pretty much interchangeable.
Field agents, not so much.
-
@Jolly said in Secret Service under fire:
Bongino said right after the assassination attempt, that his sources in the department told him they had to borrow agents from other agencies.
I would guess that desk-riders are pretty much interchangeable.
Field agents, not so much.
@George-K said in Secret Service under fire:
@Jolly said in Secret Service under fire:
Bongino said right after the assassination attempt, that his sources in the department told him they had to borrow agents from other agencies.
I would guess that desk-riders are pretty much interchangeable.
Field agents, not so much.
No, these are going to be guys with guns. But there are guys with guns and then there is the Secret Service.
-
@George-K said in Secret Service under fire:
@Jolly said in Secret Service under fire:
Bongino said right after the assassination attempt, that his sources in the department told him they had to borrow agents from other agencies.
I would guess that desk-riders are pretty much interchangeable.
Field agents, not so much.
No, these are going to be guys with guns. But there are guys with guns and then there is the Secret Service.
-
Sean Davis:
If you are a member of Congress preparing for the Secret Service hearing on Monday, do us all a favor and ask short, specific, factual questions. We don’t need you wasting time with stupid speeches or dumb questions the regime will filibuster.
Here’s a list for you.
Here’s an abbreviated list of extremely basic factual questions about the Trump assassination attempt that for some reason haven’t been definitively answered (anonymous leaks don’t count):
-
What make, model, and caliber of firearm was used, and when/where/by whom was it purchased?
-
What make and model of ammo was used (including the weight of the bullet used)?
-
Did the rifle used have any type of magnified optic or red dot sight on it, and if so, what make/model, and what exact setting was the optic on when the shooter used it?
-
Have authorities put identical rounds through the rifle with the identical optics settings and confirmed both the zero and the result of shots fired at the range at which they were fired on Saturday?
-
How many shell casings were recovered from the crime scene? How many remaining rounds were in the magazine that was found in the rifle?
-
How many rounds were fired by the shooter on the warehouse rooftop? Has each round been accounted for (i.e., do investigators know where each round landed, and does the number of bullets found or accounted for match the number of shell casings found?
-
Have investigators confirmed, via the recovered bullets and the known trajectory of the bullets, that the shooter on the rooftop fired each one?
-
Have investigators reconstructed the shooter’s precise movements over the past days, weeks, and months? If so, have they put together a list of every person with whom he interacted over that time period, but in person and virtually or online?
-
Have investigators reviewed video surveillance of the shooter at all various locations he recently visited (e.g., gun range, gun dealer, restaurants, traffic cameras, etc.)? If so, have they canvassed and interviewed each person seen with the shooter?
These aren’t difficult questions to answer. These are usually the types of details promptly provided by authorities in the days following shocking, violent events of national importance.
Yet we do not have a single one of these questions definitely answered on the record by an official authority. Not one.
Why the heck not?
-
