Posted on 07/15/2024 6:49:48 AM PDT by george76
New details about the assassination attempt on President Trump are coming fast.
Earlier this morning former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino gave his opinion about the Secret Service almost unfathomable drop in security protocol that allowed a gunman with a rifle to climb atop a building a mere 130 yards away from President Trump. Having some very specific insight into protection detail protocol, Bongino gives a unique perspective on what might have gone wrong.
...
Making matters worse, the FBI are in charge of the investigation. The FBI has suffered irreversible credibility collapse, and many believe there is no worse agency to investigate the events than a highly politicized and weaponized Federal Bureau of Investigation, with a long and non-debatable history of corruption.
Obviously, accepting the lack of public trust in both the FBI and Secret Service, there is mounting speculation as to whether the assassination effort was the result of a series of grossly incompetent mistakes, or was perhaps a willfully blind -and intentional- failure of security.
Adding fuel to the fire of intentional security failures, the AP is now reporting that a police officer saw the gunman before the shots were fired, and the police officer retreated allowing time for the shooter to fire 5 shots toward his target – wounding President Trump and two other attendees, killing another.
(VIA AP) – […] Not long before shots rang out, rallygoers noticed a man climbing to the roof of a nearby building and warned local police, according to two law enforcement officials.
One local police officer climbed to the roof and encountered Crooks, who pointed his rifle at the officer. The officer retreated down the ladder, and Crooks quickly took a shot toward Trump, and that’s when Secret Service snipers shot him, said the officials, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.
When they saw the shooter before any shots were fired the Secret Service protocols would be to communicate to agents at the stage and have them hustle President Trump off the stage.
That failure was not a mistake. It was intentional by those who controlled communications.
> the cop could had even discharged his gun in the air as an alert <
You’ve almost got it. The cop could have discharged a bullet into the ground as an alert. The noise is, of course, all that matters.
This cop was probably a combination of frightened and confused. Some folks can still think things through when in such a condition. Some can’t.
The problem is well before any shots were fired, they were looking at a threat, even if they weren’t ready to shoot the guy, Trump should of been surrounded by SS an pulled off the stage til the threat was either determined not to be a threat(as in someone with a telescope) or the threat is eliminated.
Something is very wrong with the whole picture. How could the shooter park his car, walk across a parking lot with a long gun hanging from is shoulder dressed in shorts and t-shirt, walk up to a ladder, climb the ladder and crawl up the roof, all the while observers are yelling at police, for a perfect shot at a target 130 yards away, and no one pays any attention even though people are yelling at the police. The shooter has a better shooters position than the SS behind Trump. Then fires 4 shots before the SS CAT team takes him out. Logic is lacking.
I watched a video where people were screaming they saw the shooter climbing up to the roof several minutes before he fired a single shot. During that time the SS should have ushered Trump off the stage. TOTAL INCOMPETENCE!
Trolling ? NO.
I asked you an honest and logical question and you avoided answering it because WE ALL KNOW THE ANSWER. Why don’t you respond with an answer ? It’s a simple... YES or NO.
A cop who was trained not to fire his gun 'into the air' might be a little smarter in this circumstance and use the RADIO he has designed specifically for that purpose.
So, while hanging from a ladder with one hand, you would pull your pistol out of it’s holster, disengage the safety, raise the pistol above you and holding it with only one hand, fire at the suspect who had a rifle already pointed at your head ?
I think you are overestimating your abilities (and your courage). Try raising a pistol above your head and firing with one hand with your hand cocked at at 90 degree angle. I don’t think you will find it ‘surprisingly easy’.
OMG... You really ARE serious, aren’t you?
Where to start?
Not sure what the LEO had.. Glocks DON’T HAVE SAFETIES.
The cop, COULD have, seeing the guys with a gun,
1. Ducked down. below the roof line. and radioed
2 And then either popped up and fired AT the shooter.
3 Shot a round, or a whole mag into the air. A pistol weighs >5lbs. The LEO should have been capable of doing that.
Or 4, could have shot into the ground, Like you said, “FOR THE CHILDREN!!”
I really think you need to go someplace and get some range time in.
p
“Trolling ? NO.
I asked you an honest and logical question and you avoided answering it because WE ALL KNOW THE ANSWER. Why don’t you respond with an answer ? It’s a simple... YES or NO.”
ABSOLUTELY, 100% YES.
The infintessimal danger of a 9 or 40S&W bullet falling to earth under terminal velocity and possibly hitting a person?
That danger FAR OUTWEIGHS a person with a gun shooting into a crowd.
I'm sorry, but have you ever fired a handgun before?
Possible. I also saw elsewhere that the snipers were supposedly scanning further out from the rally site, probably because the closers rooftops should have been cleared/locked/secured.
The mistakes were made long before this officer encountered Crooks on the roof. In fact, at this point it was too late. There really should have been police and or secret service coverage on the roof to begin with. That is the thing to investigate.
LEO's on the roof, LEO cars in the parking lot, LEOS at the base of the ladder, etc.
Probably ROE...can’t shoot unless authorized over his radio. Almost like someone higher up wanted it to happen.
“...who was likely only armed with a pistol..”
Uhh, a pistol would work.
When he first arrived at the venue I’ll bet Crooks wasn’t sure if his pre-chosen sniper position would be guarded or not. He was “pleasantly” surprised.
It means that the people on stage were not notified by those SS agents who had the relevant information.
The failure of communication is not incompetence. It is not negligence. It is not a mistake or an oversight.
It is intentional.
It is criminal.
It is accessory to attempted murder.
Those who attempt to cover it up after the fact are guilty of a criminal conspiracy.
Or a small furry dog.
Former active duty serviceman on the friction between decisionmaker and trigger puller in protection gigs. In a war zone, you can’t just shoot anyone you see, but there are few witnesses and you can shoehorn narratives to paper over screw-ups. At political rallies, there are many sets of eyes, including electronic ones, to put you in prison if you mistakenly take out a civilian.
If you’re asking why the counter-sniper didn’t take the shot. You should be asking, was he allowed to make that decision on his own or did he need approval.
Protection is an interagency game of politics where the trigger puller is rarely the decision maker. Lots of unknowns go into making a decision that seems simple in hindsight. Everything is easier when you have time to judge all the variables.
Before you jump to judging the person making the call, realize they can’t see what the sniper sees and is being relayed information over a radio from someone they probably met that morning in a briefing room. There is little trust between them. The decision maker has to trust that the sniper knows what he’s looking at and isn’t mistaking it for another team on the wrong roof. If this sounds silly, I encourage to you get on a walkie talkie and try to give another human directions live.
Additionally, the real world for the Secret Service has been one of peace since Reagan. While there has undoubtedly always been risks, they have not materialized and therefore are not real to the man or woman in the field. It is very easy to be lulled into a sense of calm when nothing goes “wrong” for such a long time. You train and plan for a what if. Unfortunately, training for a what if will never replicate real world.
Real world experience is training. Unfortunately, If that training is only in peace time. If you never really get shot at, if nothing goes wrong, you end up unconsciously training peace time habits. Peace time habits end up being bad habits once you enter a real world scenario (I hesitate to say war time since this is not war).
You should ask how much training these men and woman receive and is it adequate. Unfortunately, training cost money and budgets have been reduced. It’s gets hard to justify additional training when nothing bad happens (I imagine this will now change). If you don’t know what training they get, I suggest you ask or research. It’s not what you think and often far less than it should be.
Lastly, in a world where police have been prosecuted for making incorrect decisions or taking action that results in a suspect being killed, do you think that thought doesn’t weigh on their every decision? If you think it shouldn’t impact them, I encourage you to think harder. Nobody wants to go to jail for doing their job. Right, wrong or indifferent. Police included.
To close, if you are pointing blame at someone else for what they did or didn’t do, you should look around and realize this is the world you allowed to develop. We allowed police to be defunded. We allowed politics to become so divided. Yesterday was just the result of a long list of small decisions that culminated in a near miss. What looks like a cause on the surface is rarely the root cause. If you aren’t asking questions, you will never get to the root cause and in turn solutions that can fix this.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.