They shot Trump

Alea jacta est…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ovidio

Alea jacta est…

---

I'm not sure even Julius would want to wade in to this mess :ugh:

He had different methods to solve problems.
Mess? Where’s the mess?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jond41403

Regardless of any of that, it does not apply to the secret service. If it did, all the enemy or would be snipers would have to do would be study OSHA regulations to know what the secret service or military can and can't do haha. When it comes to protecting the life of a president or former president or soon to be president, all stops are pulled out and safety is only focused on the president, not the agents. If the military or secret service had to follow OSHA rules, they would not be able to get their job done. It would be ridiculous to see secret service or police or military snipers tied off to every high up position they obtain, it's just not practical. This cheatle lady not voluntarily resigning after being globally humiliated says a lot. She seems to think she did nothing wrong haha. Regardless, she could never be fully trusted again by any of her clients that she supposed to protect

---

Why are you so fixated with tie-offs and safety harnesses? I have most certainly not suggested that Law enforcement should have used them.

---------- Post added at 03:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:41 AM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by painter777

I understand safety for workers but they've gone overboard.

---

The problem is common sense has gone out of the window.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

Why are you so fixated with tie-offs and safety harnesses? I have most certainly not suggested that Law enforcement should have used them.

---------- Post added at 03:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:41 AM ----------



The problem is common sense has gone out of the window.

---

I'm sorry I must have misunderstood but you are the one that seems fixated on agent and officer safety and the rules or laws of our country pertaining to such safety which would be OSHA. Like when the cheatle lady said she didn't want officers on that roof because of safety concerns with the slope and you seemed to defend that decision which her decision is ludicrous. everyone knows what she said is Ludacris except you!I have only told you how our secret service works because you seem to have no clue. To the point it almost seems you are trolling. That kind of stuff is best suited for platforms like YouTube or Twitter. If you are not trolling I apologize but it sure seems like you are to me. You seem to lean against almost anything I comment like I don't know what I'm talking about. If I'm not sure, I usually comment that I'm not sure. and if I'm wrong, I admit I'm wrong and usually thank the person that corrected my wrong.So what's your point? How are we all wrong? It's getting even more confusing because you are commenting on things that do not pertain to anything going on currently which is the attempt at assassination of Trump and how the secret service screwed up big time. It has nothing to do with what any agent was wearing, or safety measures preventing a secret service sniper or police from being on that roof. Some secret service where police vests, some wear black suits, some wear plain clothes.It's just excuses they are rambling off to save face and cover their own hind ends. Also, in the United States, any safety measures concerning heights is going to include tie-offs(hence the "fixation "and other members" fixation"with tie offs)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

Why did they have "Police" on their vests then if they were "Secret Service" (counter snipers)?

There does sound like an element of too many agencies involved and perhaps a breakdown in communication between them.

---

Because secret service where police vests, black suits, plain clothes, and various other uniforms. They don't all wear the same uniforms like a ball team

---------- Post added at 01:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:02 AM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

If the safety of law enforcement officers that are being asked to go onto a roof is being considered then I believe that is a reasonable consideration. It is not just the risk of falling off a roof but also the risk of falling through a roof. It all depends on a number of different variables such as the type of roof material, how strong the roof is, how many people are on the roof , etc etc.

---

It is not a reasonable consideration by the secret service director to not put agents on that roof because of a slope,it's ludicrous

---------- Post added at 01:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:05 AM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

How are you so sure of this?

There is sometimes a difference between what is supposed to happen and what does happen.

---

I am sure the same way everybody else on here is sure. From the very beginning the secret service said they had the inner perimeter and the police had the outer perimeter. The snipers behind Trump's stage with the police vests on were obviously on the inner perimeter which should tell anybody they were secret service. They are not going to trust police snipers enough to put them right behind Trump. Anything that close to him is going to be reserved for secret service only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jond41403

They are not going to trust police snipers enough to put them right behind Trump. Anything that close to him is going to be reserved for secret service only.

---

The weirdest part of all this is how the guy missed at only 140 yards. That's actually pretty close.

Yes Mr Trump was extremely lucky. Thank goodness that guy was a horrible shot because like you say, it was such a short range ,I don't see how he missed either. I saw a video explaining just how close Trump came to being hit right in the forehead. It is amazing, he turned his head to the side just in the nick of time to be hit in the ear instead of the head. If he hadn't have turned to his right to look at a screen when he was talking about immigration statistics, he would be dead right now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MAC702

The weirdest part of all this is how the guy missed at only 140 yards. That's actually pretty close.

---

Has anybody heard of any reports on if the shooter used an optic or anything? The articles I read just mentioned the brand and caliber but mentions nothing about if any optics were used. Still though, even with iron sights that should have been a relatively easy shot.

JD,
Sounds like the Sniper had a partial view of Crooks right side of his face and front of a optic, just above the ridge of the 1/12 pitched roof.
It is believed at this time the Butler Police officer that was raised over the roof, catching Crooks attention before the officer dropped back down caused Crooks to rush his 8 (?) shots.

I'm watching the Oversight Hearing now. Cheatle isn't giving detailed answers.

FYI: A 1/12 pitch is the correct slope for a wheelchair ramp.