Crime Someone tried to assassinate Donald Trump at his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania

San Marino said:
@Bojka
I think Crooks' was using plain iron sights. Seems like the guy was not a very good shot - at the range. Imagine the adrenaline at the top of that roof. Just how hot was it to be in the prone in a metal roof during a hot day?
View attachment 1054483
View attachment 1054486
View attachment 1054487
Click to expand...

If Crooks was not even using a sight on his gun at that distance.. I assume that quells that inside job/government hit job conspiritards.. as if choosing an incel who was a bad shot wasn't already proof enough, using a tool that was unequipped for the job solidifies it.

So the gunman wasn't involved in anything but being a crazy loser.

Still doesn't excuse the SS/security failures though.
 
ColemanwastheGOAT said:
Good news for two reasons:

1) it's good to know and

2) this will humiliate a few of the biggest dumbasses on the site who parroted that narrative for two weeks into abandoning the thread
Click to expand...
Random online post that hasn't been confirmed to be the shooter.

The @epicmicrowave account, which Torba has been unable to confirm belongs to Crooks, was last active on the site in 2021.
Click to expand...

<{hughesimpress}>
 
kflo said:
i don't believe you believe that's the way it should work.
Click to expand...

Of course that's what I believe I just said it.

I would be open to the idea that in the incredibly rare circumstance that if a former non-incumbent President is running for office they could have a larger detail than an ordinary challenger in the future.

But at the expense of protection of serving government officials that are vital to the chain of command and line of succession? Absolutely not. That's pretty ridiculous.
 
Rational Poster said:
Of course that's what I believe I just said it.

I would be open to the idea that in the incredibly rare circumstance that if a former non-incumbent President is running for office they could have a larger detail than an ordinary challenger in the future.

But at the expense of protection of serving government officials that are vital to the chain of command and line of succession? Absolutely not. That's pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...
you're including their families, and completely ignoring any risk assessment.

i don't know what "vital to the chain of command" means either. are all of these roles demanding of greater protection for the good of the nation than the former president and presidential nominee? you think the consequences to our nation are greater if a family member of the secretary of agriculture is harmed is greater than if trump is harmed?

The U.S. Constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 outline the presidential order of succession. The line of succession of cabinet officers is in the order of their agencies’ creation.

  1. Vice President
  2. Speaker of the House
  3. President Pro Tempore of the Senate
  4. Secretary of State
  5. Secretary of the Treasury
  6. Secretary of Defense
  7. Attorney General
  8. Secretary of the Interior
  9. Secretary of Agriculture
  10. Secretary of Commerce
  11. Secretary of Labor
  12. Secretary of Health and Human Services
  13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
  14. Secretary of Transportation
  15. Secretary of Energy
  16. Secretary of Education
  17. Secretary of Veterans Affairs
  18. Secretary of Homeland Security
 
kflo said:
you're including their families, and completely ignoring any risk assessment.

i don't know what "vital to the chain of command" means either. are all of these roles demanding of greater protection for the good of the nation than the former president and presidential nominee? you think the consequences to our nation are greater if a family member of the secretary of agriculture is harmed is greater than if trump is harmed?

The U.S. Constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 outline the presidential order of succession. The line of succession of cabinet officers is in the order of their agencies’ creation.

  1. Vice President
  2. Speaker of the House
  3. President Pro Tempore of the Senate
  4. Secretary of State
  5. Secretary of the Treasury
  6. Secretary of Defense
  7. Attorney General
  8. Secretary of the Interior
  9. Secretary of Agriculture
  10. Secretary of Commerce
  11. Secretary of Labor
  12. Secretary of Health and Human Services
  13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
  14. Secretary of Transportation
  15. Secretary of Energy
  16. Secretary of Education
  17. Secretary of Veterans Affairs
  18. Secretary of Homeland Security
Click to expand...
Of course their families would be included, they are a potential avenue of coercion. Why wouldn't they be?

I do believe active members of government are more important to its function than ordinary citizens, even former Presidents. I do believe they are all entitled to a similar level of protection.

You're also just assuming without evidence that Trump's detail was worse than the officials listed because there was failure. I would assume his protection was as good or better than most of the people you've listed.
 
Rational Poster said:
Of course their families would be included, they are a potential avenue of coercion. Why wouldn't they be?

I do believe active members of government are more important to its function than ordinary citizens, even former Presidents. I do believe they are all entitled to a similar level of protection.

You're also just assuming without evidence that Trump's detail was worse than the officials listed because there was failure. I would assume his protection was as good or better than most of the people you've listed.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t assuming that. I responded to you suggesting he ranks lower than them in importance of quality security detail.

You said “the best teams are going to be assigned to officials and the families of officials currently in government.”
 
kflo said:
I wasn’t assuming that. I responded to you suggesting he ranks lower than them in importance of quality security detail.

You said “the best teams are going to be assigned to officials and the families of officials currently in government.”
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's an entirely true statement as well.

That means the best teams are assigned to the most important government officials, it doesn't mean every government official has or had better protection than Trump.

A citizen without any function in government is going to have a lower priority than a lot of people with a government position.
 
San Marino said:
@Bojka
I think Crooks' was using plain iron sights. Seems like the guy was not a very good shot - at the range. Imagine the adrenaline at the top of that roof. Just how hot was it to be in the prone in a metal roof during a hot day?
View attachment 1054483
View attachment 1054486
View attachment 1054487
Click to expand...
Dunno, the shot was right on without the head turn, so hitting a head sized target from 140 yards with iron sights after he turned the gun at the cop who confronted him and having to reset quickly and start shooting is a pretty good shot for a 20 year old who isn't especially trained.

Even more, the dude flew his drone over to find out what position on the roof to be where a tree would block him from the south side sniper team, and the north team that did shoot him was facing the other way, then shimmy up the back of the roof so he wouldn't be visible until he was over the peak. Plus homemade explosives with a detonator apparently without having any search history on how to make it, a range finder, then got a ladder that he didn't end up needing, but did get one because he already knew where he was going to shoot from probably a week in advance.


Rational Poster said:
Yes, that was to demonstrate the point how officials with duties running the state are more important to the function of the government than people not doing that.
Click to expand...
Lol, your new theory is that they just phone it in and send their D squad for some people who are "less important"?
 
nostradumbass said:
Dunno, the shot was right on without the head turn, so hitting a head sized target from 140 yards with iron sights after he turned the gun at the cop who confronted him and having to reset quickly and start shooting is a pretty good shot.

Even more, the dude flew his drone over to find out what position on the roof to be where a tree would block him from the south side sniper team, and the north team that did shoot him was facing the other way, then shimmy up the back of the roof so he wouldn't be visible until he was over the peak. Plus homemade explosives with a detonator apparently without having any search history on how to make it, a range finder, then got a ladder that he didn't end up needing, but did get one because he already knew where he was going to shoot from probably a week in advance.



Lol, your new theory is that they just phone it in and send their D squad for some people who are "less important"?
Click to expand...

No, it's not a theory, it's a reality of logistics and distribution of manpower.

You can't have the best people doing everything, everywhere, all at once for everyone.
 
USA!USA! said:
If Crooks was not even using a sight on his gun at that distance.. I assume that quells that inside job/government hit job conspiritards.. as if choosing an incel who was a bad shot wasn't already proof enough, using a tool that was unequipped for the job solidifies it.

So the gunman wasn't involved in anything but being a crazy loser.

Still doesn't excuse the SS/security failures though.
Click to expand...
Lmao. God the level of intelligence of lefties on this board. Same something else youre hilarious.
 
Rational Poster said:
No, it's not a theory, it's a reality of logistics and distribution of manpower.

You can't have the best people doing everything, everywhere, all at once for everyone.
Click to expand...
Who are "the best people"? You think they rank them and send the bums and diversity hires to higher risk settings with higher risk targets because it's not as big of a deal if they get assassinated?

"Hey, Susan, we've ranked you dead ladt and really just hired you to fill a quota, so we're sending you to guard the most threatened person in politics because they aren’t really that important, and we're going to skip the briefing meeting and put you on a different radio frequency from the people over there. Anyway, best of luck."
 
Last edited:
nostradumbass said:
Who are "the best people"? You think they rank them and send the bums and diversity hires to higher risk settings with higher risk targets because it's not as big of a deal if they get assassinated?
Click to expand...

The ones with the most experience and track record of successful operations?
 
Rational Poster said:
Yeah, that's an entirely true statement as well.

That means the best teams are assigned to the most important government officials, it doesn't mean every government official has or had better protection than Trump.

A citizen without any function in government is going to have a lower priority than a lot of people with a government position.
Click to expand...
So they get better detail, but that doesn’t imply trump gets worse detail?

and you’re still not making any allowance for the risk of being targeted playing a role in the prioritization of the quality of security detail.

The impact to the country would be far greater if trump was assassinated than if the secretary of agriculture was. Or their spouse.
 
Rational Poster said:
You're also just assuming without evidence that Trump's detail was worse than the officials listed because there was failure. I would assume his protection was as good or better than most of the people you've listed.
Click to expand...

Is that why they director of the secret service stepped down in disgrace?
 
Rational Poster said:
You can't have the best people doing everything, everywhere, all at once for everyone
Click to expand...
Yes, you absolutely can. This applies to any industry if you make training and accountability the top priority for your workforce then your weakest link will be as capable as your strongest.

This entire administration has proven to be incompetent quite often, and this is just another example of it.

Of course you, the quintessential hack, would be the one to offering up lame apologies for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,275,211
Messages
57,974,918
Members
175,889
Latest member
MEthzale

Share this page

Back
Top