Trump Assassination Attempt(s)

#3,651
#3,651
bpalmer28 said:
I didn’t realize women had such a presence in the secret service. I’m all for equality, but when the director is a woman, her assistant is a woman, and when 2 people assigned to Trumps personal detail are women…. You have to think they’ve moved beyond equality and into the realm of negligence due to a desire to be cool by liberal standards.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with having women in the SS, but they need to be qualified for the job and not just be there because they are "women" to meet a quota.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol, 85SugarVol, TN-POSSUM and 4 others
#3,652
#3,652
BigOrangeMojo said:
Richard Goldinger, the Butler County district attorney, says it is “surprising” that the shooter was able to position himself on a nearby rooftop before opening fire at the Trump rally.⁠
.⁠
Speaking to MSNBC, he said that “I do know we had some law enforcement in that building, which is even more surprising that he was able to get up there”, adding the unit was normally used by a glass manufacturing company.
Click to expand...
JUst had a fleeting thought. There could have been a local stationed at a place to keep eyes on the building but walked away from post to see DJT's rally in person, go to the bathroom, etc.

But again, that ladder is a real problem for me to work around. There's no way a ladder could've been placed by local LEOs to give them quick access to the roof is there???
 
#3,653
#3,653
McDad said:
I don't think RT or anyone, including me, is making excuses about what occurred. I think we are saying there could be legitimate reasons for the event that have nothing to do with conspiracy or deviation from SOP.

I will absolutely agree what happened should not happen. But before we go scorched earth and burn the SS leadership and agents to the ground, we need to wait until the facts (especially the facts we aren't privy to) come out.
Click to expand...
We won't find out the truth. We'll hear what they want to spin
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol, MemphisVol77, marcusluvsvols and 7 others
#3,657
#3,657
BigOrangeMojo said:
Says the guy who doesnt think the former POTUS being 1 inch away from getting his head blown off isnt a colossal failure of security...
Click to expand...
RockyTop85 said:
I’m open to the idea of a colossal failure, and I agree that somebody getting a shot on the former president is a failure. It puts the ball in USSS court to answer all of those questions. It’s the first time in 43 years that they’ve ****ed up to this degree and I can see plausible answers to some of the questions that are being asked so I’m open to hearing the answers.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen, McDad, BigOrangeMojo and 1 other person
#3,658
#3,658
Carp said:
Translation: I don't have real reasons. I am just repeating what I hear on MSNBC and CNN.

And I am not MAGA by the way. I haven't voted Trump in any election to date. I haven't voted for any Democrats either, save a couple of local races where I actually knew the candidate. I would be best described as a moderate Republican.
Click to expand...
Unlike the rabid MAGAs and stealth MAGAs here, I don't care who you did or didn't vote for. I can only be puzzled why you all care about who I vote for. As for your opening statement, you're just admitting you're too dense or lazy to read back on posts only from yesterday regarding Hitler and Trump. Trash fishing, as it were.
1721053206840.jpeg
 
#3,659
#3,659
RebKell said:
Saw this just now. , Sorry this is such BS.
Click to expand...
She could have dismissed this case months ago, if she thought the appointment of a special prosecutor violated the Constitution. She saw Clarence Thomas's opinion as an opening. This is ridiculous. I don't think it will help Trump at all to be seen as benefitting from an obviously biased judge, who he appointed. It will definitely be appealed.
 
#3,660
#3,660
BowlBrother85 said:
Well, of course, she is going to cite a different reason. She could have dismissed this case for that reason months ago, however.

This will be heavily scrutinized .... Her reasoning is a crock.
Click to expand...
No. She allowed both sides to present their argument on the Spec. Counsel issue and then made a decision. That is the proper thing to do in gathering information for any appeals. This is unlike corrupt judge Merchan who did not allow arguments on key issues in NY.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol, marcusluvsvols and Vol737
#3,661
#3,661
Orangeslice13 said:
And yet his political donations and posts say otherwise
I’m a registered democrat. That doesn’t mean anything
Click to expand...
Agreed. Of all the ways to try to figure out motive, using voter registration alone is probably the absolute worst.

I registered to vote as a freshman in college. I registered as a D, primarily because an R was in office and I wanted to choose who I thought would be the best D if the R was to be beaten in the general. After school, I worked for years for an elected official who was a D. I maintained that registration so I could vote for my boss in the primaries. The county in which I live is primarily (80% or more) R. When the old boss was finally defeated many years later, I changed to an R so I could have a legit voice in my local elections.

Looking at my registrations, would anyone know anything real about my electoral preferences or my political preferences? No, not really.

I admit it, my registrations have always been about maximizing my (minimal) impact in any given election. It says very little about my political leanings, and far less about who I would shoot, and why I would shoot them, if I were disposed to take another person's life, (which I am NOT, just to be clear.) Heck, it doesn't even tell you who I voted for in any given election! It is a poor independent factor to make any consequential determination about a person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, Orangeslice13 and DuckInAPen
#3,665
#3,665
McDad said:
I don't think RT or anyone, including me, is making excuses about what occurred. I think we are saying there could be legitimate reasons for the event that have nothing to do with conspiracy or deviation from SOP.

I will absolutely agree what happened should not happen. But before we go scorched earth and burn the SS leadership and agents to the ground, we need to wait until the facts (especially the facts we aren't privy to) come out.
Click to expand...

Look, I think you're just trying to be a lovable contrarian. RT is doing his best to defend the indefensible. Two completely different motives.

BTW I don't think this was some grand conspiracy I think it was typical government ineptitude.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#3,666
#3,666
CobbVol said:
No. She allowed both sides to present their argument on the Spec. Counsel issue and then made a decision. That is the proper thing to do in gathering information for any appeals. This is unlike corrupt judge Merchan who did not allow arguments on key issues in NY.
Click to expand...
This decision could have been made months ago ..... It is a crock, and will be appealed. There will be outrage over this.

Cannon has already had one ruling in Trump's favor overturned (the appointment of a special master). This should be as well.
 
#3,667
#3,667
LSU-SIU said:
No they're not. Trump is in charge of his life bro. If Trump wants to go somewhere, they have to go.

If they were in charge, he would be in a basement.
Click to expand...
I am not so certain about that. In an emergency situation, I do not think POTUS has any say.
 
#3,668
#3,668
Ritzwatch said:
Agreed. Of all the ways to try to figure out motive, using voter registration alone is probably the absolute worst.

I registered to vote as a freshman in college. I registered as a D, primarily because an R was in office and I wanted to choose who I thought would be the best D if the R was to be beaten in the general. After school, I worked for years for an elected official who was a D. I maintained that registration so I could vote for my boss in the primaries. The county in which I live is primarily (80% or more) R. When the old boss was finally defeated many years later, I changed to an R so I could have a legit voice in my local elections.

Looking at my registrations, would anyone know anything real about my electoral preferences or my political preferences? No, not really.

I admit it, my registrations have always been about maximizing my (minimal) impact in any given election. It says very little about my political leanings, and far less about who I would shoot, and why I would shoot them, if I were disposed to take another person's life, (which I am NOT, just to be clear.) Heck, it doesn't even tell you who I voted for in any given election! It is a poor independent factor to make any consequential determination about a person.
Click to expand...

Being involved in the past with Republican party, they have started to look more at trends than one-times. (This is mostly for candidates). I think there was a rule that you had to vote 3 out of the last 5 chances in the Republican party to be eligible for office (so by 3 of 5, you can't also just not vote, it has to be show up and vote). It will also report if you voted D.
 
#3,670
#3,670
hog88 said:
Look, I think you're just trying to be a lovable contrarian. RT is doing his best to defend the indefensible. Two completely different motives.

BTW I don't think this was some grand conspiracy I think it was typical government ineptitude.
Click to expand...
RockyTop85 said:
I’m open to the idea of a colossal failure, and I agree that somebody getting a shot on the former president is a failure. It puts the ball in USSS court to answer all of those questions. It’s the first time in 43 years that they’ve ****ed up to this degree and I can see plausible answers to some of the questions that are being asked so I’m open to hearing the answers.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
#3,674
#3,674
lawgator1 said:
It will be interesting to see how long the truce on heated rhetoric lasts.

My guess is both conventions reflect it.

But I'd give it maybe 10 days after that. Hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Democrats may go back to using proxies (media and Hollywood) and Republicans may do the same. Basically have people not in the party say all the bad stuff so you don't have your hands red.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top