Politics Has Trump been shot?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
e_blazer said:
Not sure that she had any direct responsibility for the security plans that day, but way too big of a blunder for heads not to roll.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of professional people in the SS. But, the incopetetant director put incopetetant people in charge of the security at the rally, rather than the professionals that knew what they were doing.
 
oldfisherman said:
There are a lot of professional people in the SS. But, the incopetetant director put incopetetant people in charge of the security at the rally, rather than the professionals that knew what they were doing.
Click to expand...
This. 100%.

I'm not sure if it was criminal. But it was definitely a huge failure well worthy of losing your job and never being allowed leadership responsibilities in any government position again.
 
Phatguysrule said:
This. 100%.

I'm not sure if it was criminal. But it was definitely a huge failure well worthy of losing your job and never being allowed leadership responsibilities in any government position again.
Click to expand...

I don't know. It's not clear to me, although I haven't been following the reporting carefully, that she personally influenced the choice of personnel/resources at that particular rally. I'd think that those decisions would be made at a lower level down the chain.

Which is not to say she's not ultimately responsible - she is. But getting rid of her may not actually fix anything at all unless the new person does some housecleaning.

barfo
 
Difference between science and pseudoscience. One investigates and draws conclusions based on discoverable facts. Other starts with conclusion and demands investigation support it.
Investigation ongoing. Definite security failure. No reason to think malice on part of director or even incompetence. Could be bad communication . Don't know. Agree someone's head would roll Her stonewalling made her look arrogant.
I am going to wait for investigation because I have no special knowledge of what happened. Neither does anyone else here.
 
Some interesting bits of info came out of the hearing.

The director was asked about the 50% turnover in SS employees the year she became director.

This ties in with other reports made by former SS agents that resigned when she took office. They knew her from her prior service. And refused to work for her.
 
Reports I have seen turnover too high began before current director. Agency under resourced. Long hours and constant travel, lot of burnout. Something that needs to be addressed.
 
oldfisherman said:
Some interesting bits of info came out of the hearing.

The director was asked about the 50% turnover in SS employees the year she became director.

This ties in with other reports made by former SS agents that resigned when she took office. They knew her from her prior service. And refused to work for her.
Click to expand...

50% turnover in one year? I'm guessing that that's some sort of misunderstanding. Got a link for that figure?
SS does have a turnover problem, and has for a lot longer that she was director.

barfo
 
crandc said:
Difference between science and pseudoscience. One investigates and draws conclusions based on discoverable facts. Other starts with conclusion and demands investigation support it.
Investigation ongoing. Definite security failure. No reason to think malice on part of director or even incompetence. Could be bad communication . Don't know. Agree someone's head would roll Her stonewalling made her look arrogant.
I am going to wait for investigation because I have no special knowledge of what happened. Neither does anyone else here.
Click to expand...
Nope. I have no special knowledge. But somebody should have made sure there was no access to any line of site roof or building within a mile radius of that podium (maybe further).

Look. I'm not emotional that somebody took a shot at Trump. I'm not even sure how sorry I'd be if they succeeded...

But the secret service can't let what happened happen. That specific situation was not difficult to avoid. I'd be surprised of the ineptitude of the secret service doesn't embolden more assholes to pull something like this.

You just can't have that without a very public and severe correction.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Nope. I have no special knowledge. But somebody should have made sure there was no access to any line of site roof or building within a mile radius of that podium (maybe further).

Look. I'm not emotional that somebody took a shot at Trump. I'm not even sure how sorry I'd be if they succeeded...

But the secret service can't let what happened happen. That specific situation was not difficult to avoid. I'd be surprised of the ineptitude of the secret service doesn't embolden more assholes to pull something like this.

You just can't have that without a very public and severe correction.
Click to expand...
Agree. That is fact based.
 
Yet another interesting nugget of info from the hearing.

The SS has a policy of recording all communications between agents during a security event, such as Trumps rally. None were recorded during Trumps rally. Hmmmm, more red flags.
 
oldfisherman said:
Yet another interesting nugget of info from the hearing.

The SS has a policy of recording all communications between agents during a security event, such as Trumps rally. None were recorded during Trumps rally. Hmmmm, more red flags.
Click to expand...

Sort of like how all the SS communications got erased after Jan 6th.

barfo
 
barfo said:
Yeah, like I'm going to watch 5 hours of video to see if you are right...

Still not believing the 50% in one year, but thanks for the link, I guess.

barfo
Click to expand...

I'm not watching 5 hours of that toxic woman again. Once was enough.

To be fair, from memory. She balked at the 50% figure. But gave the impression it was only slightly less than that.
 
beast crnjo said:
So why did 50 former top intelligence officials jump at the chance to lie about the Hunter Biden laptop? Why did Chuck Shumer say that Trump had crossed the intelligence community, and they have 6 ways from Sunday to get back at him?
Click to expand...

I don't know. You tell me. Has the CIA fallen to the anti-American radicals? Does Chuck Shumer have an alibi for the day of the assassination attempt? Can anyone account for Hunter Biden's crackpipe????

Honestly I'm not concerned with whatever political theater is getting Fox and MSNBC their ratings. Lockheed Martin and friends certainly didn't, as long as they keep getting paid. And under Trump, they got paaaaiid. Under Trump, the CIA got to do even more rat-fucking than under Obama. It's not a hard equation to solve.
 
TradeNurkicNow said:
I don't know. You tell me. Has the CIA fallen to the anti-American radicals? Does Chuck Shumer have an alibi for the day of the assassination attempt? Can anyone account for Hunter Biden's crackpipe????

Honestly I'm not concerned with whatever political theater is getting Fox and MSNBC their ratings. Lockheed Martin and friends certainly didn't, as long as they keep getting paid. And under Trump, they got paaaaiid. Under Trump, the CIA got to do even more rat-fucking than under Obama. It's not a hard equation to solve.
Click to expand...

The military budget went up 100 billion under the Biden administration, and Trump has the audacity to threaten to sue for peace in Ukraine. The deep state doesn't seem to like peace makers.
 
beast crnjo said:
The military budget went up 100 billion under the Biden administration, and Trump has the audacity to threaten to sue for peace in Ukraine. The deep state doesn't seem to like peace makers.
Click to expand...

I've heard some wild takes, but describing Trump as a "peace maker" is one of the wildest. Another wild thing is to take Trump at his word that he would end the war in Ukraine, as if he has the ability or motivation to do so. It's campaign rhetoric on par with "the deal of the century" that was supposed to solve Palestine-Israel.

It takes a small amount of critical thinking to see past his carnival barking. I don't understand why so many people believe him.
 
TradeNurkicNow said:
I've heard some wild takes, but describing Trump as a "peace maker" is one of the wildest. Another wild thing is to take Trump at his word that he would end the war in Ukraine, as if he has the ability or motivation to do so. It's campaign rhetoric on par with "the deal of the century" that was supposed to solve Palestine-Israel.

It takes a small amount of critical thinking to see past his carnival barking. I don't understand why so many people believe him.
Click to expand...

They don't actually believe him, they just how he's made it ok for them to be racist and sexist out loud and not feel ashamed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Featured content

Back
Top