Pewit 970 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, steve66 said: C for me The most likely but the big question is, why were they slow to react? If that's their genuine response then those snipers should be fired immediately. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
steve66 3,350 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 The kid was a poor shot , had no chance of escaping and was only going to end up at the undertakers the question is how come the security messed up ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dogmandont 9,737 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 B and C, wasnt planned by the deep state but was aloud to happen. It was inevitable that some nut job was going to take a shot at Trump they just had to make sure he got the space to do it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
steve66 3,350 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 4 minutes ago, Pewit said: The most likely but the big question is, why were they slow to react? If that's their genuine response then those snipers should be fired immediately. That the bit I don’t understand , how he was allowed to climb up onto the roof and take a shot ? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dogmandont 9,737 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 Just now, steve66 said: The kid was a poor shot , had no chance of escaping and was only going to end up at the undertakers the question is how come the security messed up ? Supposedly the secret service sniper had eyes on the shooter for over 60 seconds and was told not to take the shot, if that's true then there's only one real conclusion. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
steve66 3,350 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, dogmandont said: B and C, wasnt planned by the deep state but was aloud to happen. It was inevitable that some nut job was going to take a shot at Trump they just had to make sure he got the space to do it. Does actually make sense Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kanny 20,410 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 This puts the timelines together of various videos 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pewit 970 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 If they are going to allow a gunman to take a shot at him then surely it's within reach that it was a plot to kill him? Is it a stretch to say he wasn't the actual gunman and that he was planted there? Oddball kid coerced in to protecting Donald from the roof whilst the real shooter is hidden from view further away? Lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chartpolski 23,038 Posted July 15 Author Report Share Posted July 15 Now that there’s a more information coming out, here’s my take on it; the SS are saying outside the perimeter was the jurisdiction of the local law authority. Inside the perimeter was the SS jurisdiction. People saw the gunman on the roof and informed the local law and one of them tried climbing onto the roof but dropped back down when the gunman pointed the rifle at him. The SS were informed of the situation and had eyes on the gunmen but didn’t open fire because they were waiting for permission. The local law dithered and the gunman opened fire and the SS snipers took the decision to take him out . Now that’s just my take on it, I may be wrong, but it looks more like cock up rather than conspiracy, two law agencies not operating in synch with each other, and neither coming out of it looking good . As for the question, I’d say it was definitely NOT a false flag operation, the bullet was far to close for comfort. As for the other two choices, well, both are viable, but I doubt we will ever find out . Cheers. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jukel123 7,957 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 The gunman made a pig's ear of it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pewit 970 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, chartpolski said: Now that there’s a more information coming out, here’s my take on it; the SS are saying outside the perimeter was the jurisdiction of the local law authority. Inside the perimeter was the SS jurisdiction. People saw the gunman on the roof and informed the local law and one of them tried climbing onto the roof but dropped back down when the gunman pointed the rifle at him. The SS were informed of the situation and had eyes on the gunmen but didn’t open fire because they were waiting for permission. The local law dithered and the gunman opened fire and the SS snipers took the decision to take him out . Now that’s just my take on it, I may be wrong, but it looks more like cock up rather than conspiracy, two law agencies not operating in synch with each other, and neither coming out of it looking good . As for the question, I’d say it was definitely NOT a false flag operation, the bullet was far to close for comfort. As for the other two choices, well, both are viable, but I doubt we will ever find out . Cheers. So they actually have to wait for orders to shoot in that situation? Surely they are trained to fire as soon as a threat is clear? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chartpolski 23,038 Posted July 15 Author Report Share Posted July 15 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Pewit said: So they actually have to wait for orders to shoot in that situation? Surely they are trained to fire as soon as a threat is clear? I haven’t got a clue . Maybe they were waiting for confirmation that it wasn’t a local law officer. Maybe the local law said they had it under control, maybe they were ordered by the SS not to take the shot until they got confirmation from the local law that the target was definitely was a threat. A lot of “maybe’s”, and of course I could be completely wrong in my assessment. But when multiple organisations are responsible for an event and neither knows each other’s protocols completely, then cock ups tend to happen and the blame games start. Cheers. Edited July 15 by chartpolski Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pewit 970 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 Just now, chartpolski said: I haven got a clue . Maybe they were waiting for confirmation that it wasn’t a local law officer. Maybe the local law said they had it under control, maybe they were ordered by the SS not to take the shot until they got confirmation from the local law that the target was definitely was a threat. A lot of “maybe’s”, and of course I could be completely wrong in my assessment. But when multiple organisations are responsible for an event and neither knows each other’s protocols completely, then cock ups tend to happen and the blame games start. Cheers. I should imagine given the importance of their job that all agents are trained to shoot any potential threats and ask questions later. It would have been very clear to those agents on the roof that there was a lone gunman, it's as fishy as a fishy thing IMO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chartpolski 23,038 Posted July 15 Author Report Share Posted July 15 1 minute ago, Pewit said: I should imagine given the importance of their job that all agents are trained to shoot any potential threats and ask questions later. It would have been very clear to those agents on the roof that there was a lone gunman, it's as fishy as a fishy thing IMO. If you think it’s some sort of conspiracy , that’s fine, I respect your opinion. Im leaning more towards cock up, but as I said, I could be completely wrong, it’s just my take on it. Cheers. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pewit 970 Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 1 minute ago, chartpolski said: If you think it’s some sort of conspiracy , that’s fine, I respect your opinion. Im leaning more towards cock up, but as I said, I could be completely wrong, it’s just my take on it. Cheers. I think given their training and expertise it's more likely a setup than a cock up, they took minutes to react, that is beyond comprehension IMO. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.