Trump Assassination Attempt(s)

[WoodsmanVol]

The Secret Service not using a drone that day and then the shooter being able to use one before the event is one of the biggest red flags here. The FAA pretty much knows anytime someone launches a drone.

Count your blessings. I have long predicted that some nut will employ a kamikaze drone attack on a major American sports event stadium or arena. I was laughed at as an alarmist. Yet, some places already have trained birds of prey (BOP) to intercept and take down intrusive drones. Some use anti-drone guns or other devices to electronically disable or take control of drones. Count your blessings, Trumper? Yes, some nitwit could have used an explosive, or poison gas armed drone, or even an RC plane for the assassination attempt. Thankfully, that didn't happen. Mark my words, it's only a matter of time before some sick person makes such an attempt on a sports or political target. You have no idea just how sick society has become. Indeed, one person created a DIY drone capable of firing a hand gun. You have no idea what's to come.

 

[StarRaider]

The shot that killed the man who attempted to assassinate former President Trump at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, last Saturday was a "one-in-a-million shot," according to a source familiar with the investigation into the shooting.

Fox News learned from the source the kill shot was a single shot taken by a Secret Service counter sniper whose view was obscured.

A local tactical team also took a shot at the would-be assassin, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, but missed.

The Secret Service sniper who killed Crooks could only see Crooks’ gun scope and the top of his eye and forehead because the lip of the roof was blocking the sniper’s view.

The source described the shot to Fox News as a "one-in-a-million shot."

The news comes as more information begins to come out about the botched security detail that allowed Crooks to climb onto a building, get a clear line of sight of Trump and open fire on the former president.

While the Secret Service agents who stopped the shooter and jumped to protect Trump are being praised, the agency’s director, Kimberly Cheatle, has been harshly criticized for her handling of the matter.

The House Committee On Oversight and Accountability has scheduled a hearing for Monday with Cheatle, who is facing calls to resign from lawmakers over her agency's handling of the Trump rally shooting.

The hearing, "Oversight of the U.S. Secret Service and the Attempted Assassination of President Donald J. Trump," is scheduled to begin on Capitol Hill at 10 a.m. Monday.

 

[davethevol]

Count your blessings. I have long predicted that some nut will employ a kamikaze drone attack on a major American sports event stadium or arena. I was laughed at as an alarmist. Yet, some places already have trained birds of prey (BOP) to intercept and take down intrusive drones. Some use anti-drone guns or other devices to electronically disable or take control of drones. Count your blessings, Trumper? Yes, some nitwit could have used an explosive, or poison gas armed drone, or even an RC plane for the assassination attempt. Thankfully, that didn't happen. Mark my words, it's only a matter of time before some sick person makes such an attempt on a sports or political target. You have no idea just how sick society has become. Indeed, one person created a DIY drone capable of firing a hand gun. You have no idea what's to come.

I actually do have an idea of what’s to come because you just told me, Woody.

 

[jp1]

Actually, you can hate on anything. MAGAs prove it daily.

Speaking of proving something daily....

 

[hUTch2002]

Pinning anything on Steam is kind of ridiculous. It's like blaming Amazon for someone buying a rope they used to bind up someone in a murder.

It’s the way of the world these days. I have a client who is just a fulfillment company, like Amazon. There was a school shooting a few years back and, understandably, the victim’s parents sued. The ammo company that sold the ammo online was sued, as was anyone else involved in the process of ammo getting to that shooter. That’s normal. What bugs me is our client didn’t sell the ammo and didn’t deliver the ammo, FedEx delivered. Our client was nothing but a middle man and had zero negligence. They didn’t take the order, they didn’t deliver it, yet their insurance company ended up paying $1.5M in a settlement rather than rolling the dice in court. The kid lied online (shocker) saying he was older than he was. Really, the ammo company followed the law and FedEx did as well. Didn’t matter. They had to pay up as well. Now, there might’ve been something I didn’t know about negligence of those other parties but our client had no negligence and still had to pay. And people wonder why insurance rates are going up. It’s not stopping anytime soon either.

 

[hUTch2002]

That’s great but it still doesn’t explain why that roof wasn’t covered as that’s common sense and any 10-yo would know that once you identify a shooter that close, which seems like a fact from what I’ve seen, you either take the shooter out or, at the very least, you get the candidate off stage. That’s where this makes zero sense. Fine, you messed up and let the guy in. Fine, you don’t want to shoot him without him shooting first (ridiculous of course but let’s stick with it). Why did you not remove Trump immediately once you knew there was a potential threat? That’s where simple incompetence just doesn’t do enough to explain it. Gross negligence, maybe. But all this is why it has to be thoroughly investigated.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

Speaking of proving something daily....

Just following the fine example provided by MAGAs. Oh, what a good student I am.

 

[hUTch2002]

I am happy to explain where I am on it.

I don't like politicians. I don't like bureaucracy. I don't trust either. But my dislike and distrust is more about the inefficiency and waste of the organizations, and the lack of integrity and expanding government from the politicians.

I do not think for a second politicians or government agencies look to assassinate a domestic political rival. At the same time, I have no doubt they will do that abroad with certain people or groups deemed realistic threats. So when these events happen domestically, I ascribe them to a person on the margins of society finding opportunity in agencies that are bloated and wasteful.

I am sure this comes across as naive. And that's okay. I don't expect anyone to believe what I do. I just wanted to provide understanding if possible.

I think that’s very fair. We all certainly want to believe our government wouldn’t do such a thing. There’s no doubt some folks had a vendetta against Trump and used that to create a fake dossier, extend FISA warrants, try to impeach him and all the other nonsense but that stuff doesn’t mean they’d have someone shoot him in broad daylight on camera. The last thing they want is to make him a martyr.

 

[Orangeburst]

I actually do have an idea of what’s to come because you just told me, Woody.

Ah..but it takes wisdom to understand it.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

I actually do have an idea of what’s to come because you just told me, Woody.

Perhaps. I only told a smattering of stuff I've seen in roaming the open and hidden cybernet crevices. Other stuff out there is just as and in some ways worse. You still have no idea.

 

[rekinhavoc]

Fauci dismisses concerns over Trump's gunshot wound​

Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testifies before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic at the Rayburn House Office Building on June 03, 2024 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Dr. Anthony Fauci waved away concerns over former President Trump's gunshot wound after the assassination attempt on Trump's life during a rally in Pennsylvania last week.
On July 13, shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks fired a bullet that grazed the side of Trump's head, hitting the top of his right ear. One spectator was killed and two others were critically injured by the assailant before he was shot dead by U.S. Secret Service agents.
Fauci, during an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, said the public shouldn't be very concerned about the extent of Trump's wound and the former president's treatment.
"I don’t think there is much more to it. I mean, from what we’ve seen and what we’ve heard, it was, it was a bullet shot that grazed his ear and injured his ear, according to the physicians who examined him. There was no other further damage," Fauci said.
"So I think that with regard to the health related purely to the bullet itself, I think he’s he’s in the clear as far as I can see. I mean, it’s dangerous to make diagnoses from a distance from what I’m seeing, the way he’s acting now and what his physicians report saw. It seems to have been a superficial wound to the ear, and that’s all."


Sure sure. You get shot jackass. I'll bet Fauci would still be the fetal position.

Don't downplay an assassination attempt.

 

[LSU-SIU]

But I'm right on that criticism 199 times out of 200

 

[davethevol]

Fauci dismisses concerns over Trump's gunshot wound​

Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testifies before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic at the Rayburn House Office Building on June 03, 2024 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Dr. Anthony Fauci waved away concerns over former President Trump's gunshot wound after the assassination attempt on Trump's life during a rally in Pennsylvania last week.
On July 13, shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks fired a bullet that grazed the side of Trump's head, hitting the top of his right ear. One spectator was killed and two others were critically injured by the assailant before he was shot dead by U.S. Secret Service agents.
Fauci, during an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, said the public shouldn't be very concerned about the extent of Trump's wound and the former president's treatment.
"I don’t think there is much more to it. I mean, from what we’ve seen and what we’ve heard, it was, it was a bullet shot that grazed his ear and injured his ear, according to the physicians who examined him. There was no other further damage," Fauci said.
"So I think that with regard to the health related purely to the bullet itself, I think he’s he’s in the clear as far as I can see. I mean, it’s dangerous to make diagnoses from a distance from what I’m seeing, the way he’s acting now and what his physicians report saw. It seems to have been a superficial wound to the ear, and that’s all."


Sure sure. You get shot jackass. I'll bet Fauci would still be the fetal position.

Don't downplay an assassination attempt.

If Trump gets re-elected, I fully expect Fauci to get indicted.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Then quote the reputable source, not the usual suspects.

What like the dementia patient you voted for and put in office? Shouldn't he and his agencies be releasing like.... you know information? Like briefings to the public?

 

[volbound1700]

Then quote the reputable source, not the usual suspects.

Wall Street Journal is not a credible source?

 

[Gandalf]

I always come back to this.. they are all just stupid and really bad at their jobs

In my experience where I had inside knowledge, where people ascribed malicious intent, most of the time it was just bureaucratic incompetence.

That said, it doesn’t mean that incompetence could not work in tandem with a conspiracy of mal intent.

Something doesn’t add up about all this at a level that seems more than keystone cops.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Wall Street Journal is not a credible source?

We live in a world where the federal government is not a credible source, matter fact, they appear to be constantly manufacturing false, malice, and intentional misinformation to damage AMERICANS.

 

[Gandalf]

The shot that killed the man who attempted to assassinate former President Trump at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, last Saturday was a "one-in-a-million shot," according to a source familiar with the investigation into the shooting.

Fox News learned from the source the kill shot was a single shot taken by a Secret Service counter sniper whose view was obscured.

A local tactical team also took a shot at the would-be assassin, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, but missed.

The Secret Service sniper who killed Crooks could only see Crooks’ gun scope and the top of his eye and forehead because the lip of the roof was blocking the sniper’s view.

The source described the shot to Fox News as a "one-in-a-million shot."

The news comes as more information begins to come out about the botched security detail that allowed Crooks to climb onto a building, get a clear line of sight of Trump and open fire on the former president.

While the Secret Service agents who stopped the shooter and jumped to protect Trump are being praised, the agency’s director, Kimberly Cheatle, has been harshly criticized for her handling of the matter.

The House Committee On Oversight and Accountability has scheduled a hearing for Monday with Cheatle, who is facing calls to resign from lawmakers over her agency's handling of the Trump rally shooting.

The hearing, "Oversight of the U.S. Secret Service and the Attempted Assassination of President Donald J. Trump," is scheduled to begin on Capitol Hill at 10 a.m. Monday.

So most snipers say the shot by the loser kid was an easy layup by even a weakened marksman but the shot that killed him one in a million? Clearly not taken by the snipers on the building right next to Trump then.

I realize the SS is trying to find something to be positive about but that just makes me wonder all the more why the guys with cannons at the same distance to the kid as he was from Trump didn’t take him out with ease

 

[LSU-SIU]

So most snipers say the shot by the loser kid was an easy layup by even a weakened marksman but the shot that killed him one in a million? Clearly not taken by the snipers on the building right next to Trump then.

I was told and posted it was the 2nd team that got him. The kid had a red dot only, he didn't appear to have a rest of any kind... being harassed by police apparently (?) I wouldn't say it was horrible, not great but he did hit 4 people. The ones that made impact with people were in a fairly small window of impact.

The way it was explained to me is the 2nd team was trying to get a better view but even they were having issues.

WHY
DIDN'T
THEY
GET
ORANGE
OFF
STAGE?

It really is that simple.

 

[davethevol]

So most snipers say the shot by the loser kid was an easy layup by even a weakened marksman but the shot that killed him one in a million? Clearly not taken by the snipers on the building right next to Trump then.

I realize the SS is trying to find something to be positive about but that just makes me wonder all the more why the guys with cannons at the same distance to the kid as he was from Trump didn’t take him out with ease

They actually did take him out with ease. It’s almost as if they wanted him to get his shots off first. The fact that they got him within 7 seconds of his first shot means they already had him lined up in their sites and weren’t scrambling to find him.

 

[ButchPlz]

In my experience where I had inside knowledge, where people ascribed malicious intent, most of the time it was just bureaucratic incompetence.

That said, it doesn’t mean that incompetence could not work in tandem with a conspiracy of mal intent.

Something doesn’t add up about all this at a level that seems more than keystone cops.

This is exactly what I think it is. Again, I see it every dang day. Stupid people with no concern for bad outcomes being moved and manipulated by stupid people that are power hungry results in stuff like this.

 

[Orangeburst]

In my experience where I had inside knowledge, where people ascribed malicious intent, most of the time it was just bureaucratic incompetence.

That said, it doesn’t mean that incompetence could not work in tandem with a conspiracy of mal intent.

Something doesn’t add up about all this at a level that seems more than keystone cops.

How sad is it that we live in a nation with such distrust of our institutions. It is certainly not the fault of conspiracists for believing such.

 

[TN-POSSUM]

Are these normal numbers for an outdoor political rally event?

 

[Carl Pickens]

I guess they’re proud of how Betty Fat Fingers performed

 

[volbound1700]

How sad is it that we live in a nation with such distrust of our institutions. It is certainly not the fault of conspiracists for believing such.

History supports conspiracy theories. I imagine if you were against Hitler or Stalin and their media madness, you were called conspiracy theorists and mocked. Japanese who thought they were losing in 1944 were likely called conspiracy theorists.

Even the US government has done legit cover ups in past such as Eugenics program or coverups related to Vietnam.

I find it odd that conspiracies are sometimes mocked when they have very much happened in history.