Trump is shot!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I look forward to the explanation of the SS sniper looking towards the shooter in the scope and not firing, lifting his head while the shooter begins to fire, then taking out the shooter.

When I first saw that video it raised huge questions in my mind. It seems obvious he was already scoping the shooter before shots were fired. Maybe that’s not true, but if it is, holy shit that seems like colossal failure number two of the day 🤷🏼‍♂️
 

The law enforcement sniper (unclear if USSS) in newsreels was clearly overwhelmed as his face came off his rifle instead of doing his job to kill the shooter. Clearly they were watching the shooter but apparently have a no "first shot" policy. The only positive action was an apparent 488yd shot by one USSS sniper which despatched the assasin but after the assassin launched at least 5 rounds, wounding DJT and killing and severely others in the crowd.

In my old business of providing Diplomatic Security in two active war zones we were expected to execute the basics or we would be fired. Clearly USSS failed at the basics of a secure perimeter and once shots were fired their extraction was clumsy and left DJT highly exposed to follow on attacks. It looked like they had never drilled together because those responses should be effectively autonomic. Will there be accountability? That's not the Washington way.
 
When I first saw that video it raised huge questions in my mind. It seems obvious he was already scoping the shooter before shots were fired. Maybe that’s not true, but if it is, holy shit that seems like colossal failure number two of the day 🤷🏼‍♂️
7 seconds from when the a-hole opened fire to when he was met with return fire.

Good thing that snipers not a hunter on Norris road. Theyd have missed their opporutunity..
 
The above post is another example of the “no first shot” policy I’ve come across. No idea if that’s true.
 
I look at it like this. NONE of us were there. All we have is what we get from the various news sources. It's easy to ask questions and speculate about things or criticize, but until it gets explained and answered by the people that know those things we're just making noise. The facts may take longer than we like but they will eventually come out.
 
The above post is another example of the “no first shot” policy I’ve come across. No idea if that’s true.
I would be suprised - if a local drug addict even comes close to being a threat they get dispatched by LEO. I have a hard time believing someone can point a gun anywhere near any major politician and be granted a first shot.
I look at it like this. NONE of us were there. All we have is what we get from the various news sources. It's easy to ask questions and speculate about things or criticize, but until it gets explained and answered by the people that know those things we're just making noise. The facts may take longer than we like but they will eventually come out.
This is a totally fair and legit point.
 

The law enforcement sniper (unclear if USSS) in newsreels was clearly overwhelmed as his face came off his rifle instead of doing his job to kill the shooter. Clearly they were watching the shooter but apparently have a no "first shot" policy. The only positive action was an apparent 488yd shot by one USSS sniper which despatched the assasin but after the assassin launched at least 5 rounds, wounding DJT and killing and severely others in the crowd.

In my old business of providing Diplomatic Security in two active war zones we were expected to execute the basics or we would be fired. Clearly USSS failed at the basics of a secure perimeter and once shots were fired their extraction was clumsy and left DJT highly exposed to follow on attacks. It looked like they had never drilled together because those responses should be effectively autonomic. Will there be accountability? That's not the Washington way.
This is all speculation.

I agree it's not a good look. But this is Trump. He has a history. His crowds have a history.

Probably a nightmare to provide security for based on past actual history.

In your former job did diplomats refuse to follow your own instructions?

Again security can only be as good as they are allowed to be by those they are protecting.
 
The shooter looks like a misfit kid, probably an incel. More of a school shooter type than someone with major political feelings. I don’t think he is old enough to have voted yet in a presidential election. I did see one screenshot where he may have been on the Epstein/pedo bandwagon.
 
i know we shouldn't speculate, but this whole time i've been so impressed by how quickly SS snipers located and neutralized a shooter after shots rang out. but to learn that it seems they were already scoping him basically inverts that impression entirely. not being allowed first shot at a human who is pointing a gun at a former president? that seems whack, #@)(*%* up, actually, if we're honest.

i'll be eager to learn more
 
TMZ has some good footage and interviews.

So it makes no sense to me: why wait to take a shot AFTER the gunman pulls the trigger several times... unless, of course you are wanting him to be successful before you take him out. That way it appears you did something to "protect" who you were there to protect.
 
Glad DJT is OK, but watching videos on X, something is seriously wrong with SS. As posted, bystanders spotted shooter, SS did not; Mayorkas "doesn't know" if drones were employed.

And sorry, this diversity for diversity's sake stuff has to end. That fat woman struggling with her holster in no way should be guarding a Presidential candidate. Former SEALs, Marine Recon, Rangers, FBI HRT or other FBI Operators, something which weeds out the weak. HRT or Ranger tabbed women welcome.

And RFKJr. should have SS protection TODAY.

And this "end of Democracy" rhetoric needs to stop from both sides.
It also appears the female agent on his right side after the shooting was ducking and staying low, leaving him wide open. Either she is too short for this tasking or she was afraid of taking a bullet.

Just an observation.
 
i know we shouldn't speculate, but this whole time i've been so impressed by how quickly SS snipers located and neutralized a shooter after shots rang out. but to learn that it seems they were already scoping him basically inverts that impression entirely. not being allowed first shot at a human who is pointing a gun at a former president? that seems whack, #@)(*%* up, actually, if we're honest.

i'll be eager to learn more
Thinking the same thing yesterday when I was listening on the radio. Then saw the videos when I got home.
 
Can you imagine the headlines sniper shoots suspect at rally if he hadn’t shot.

Unfortunately without a clear eminent danger the media would have spun that along party lines.
A unidentified suspect on a roof top pointing a long rifle at the US (ex) president at a rally represents a clear and eminent danger in my eyes.
 
It also appears the female agent on his right side after the shooting was ducking and staying low, leaving him wide open. Either she is too short for this tasking or she was afraid of taking a bullet.

Just an observation.
Gonna be an awkward Monday at the office…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top