mat200
IPCT Contributor
- Jan 17, 2017
- 15,525
- 26,147
Makes perfect sense to me ..
This is probably why we have only seen one photo of this, the other cameras shutter speed was too slow and not enough fps
They just tried to assassinate Trump
- Thread starter bigredfish
- Start date
Makes perfect sense to me ..
This is probably why we have only seen one photo of this, the other cameras shutter speed was too slow and not enough fps
BOMBSHELL: Blocked OIG Report Confirms Kamala's Secret Service Role in Jan 6 Pipe Bomb Cover-Up - Revolver News
We can now confirm definitively that Kamala's Secret Service detail played a direct role in the cover-up of the pipe bomb hoax on January 6th.
revolver.news
Wow, been busy with family for the last 4 days, grandson just signup 6 years Army, going for Ranger.
Well, Well, Well, what have we got here...
Blah Blah Blah, and we can now sweep it under the rug, not answer any detailed questions, bury it for 50+ years, ignore and reject FOIA requests, etc etc etc
Lying pieces of shit and traitors.
Secret Service Takes 'Full Responsibility' For Assassination Attempt On Trump
www.zerohedge.com
Lying pieces of shit and traitors.
Secret Service Takes 'Full Responsibility' For Assassination Attempt On Trump
Secret Service Takes 'Full Responsibility' For Assassination Attempt On Trump | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Wife sent me this...ignore if this has been covered here...
The Trump Assassination Attempt & The Kennedy Connection
www.zerohedge.com
The Trump Assassination Attempt & The Kennedy Connection | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
CaptainCrunch
Getting comfortable
"How the shooter was seen by rally attendees over an hour before the attack, all the while shouting to law enforcement that milled around but did nothing to confront the shooter"
"How the police snipers had the shooter in their scopes for minutes but waited until after the attack at 6:11 PM, after eight shots were made, before finally neutralizing him"
Other than the connection between the two incidents being a stretch, it's the obvious errors and/or purposefully misleading statements that undermine the credibility of articles like this. There's been nothing that even suggests the police snipers had the guy in their sights for minutes before taking a shot. There's nothing that suggests the police snipers waited for the guy to take 8 shots before they fired. That statement is just wrong.
As for misleading, the "shooter" was seen an hour before the attack but there was nothing to indicate, at that time, he would be a shooter. At that time, he was just a guy walking around. He may have been a person of interest or a suspicious person but he was not yet a shooter and there were not indications at that time he would become a shooter. And there's been nothing that indicates rally attendees were shouting to law enforcement an hour before the shooting.
Mistakes were made that day, due either to incompetency, complacency, or purposeful disregard. This article seems to suggest purposeful disregard. But by including known errors and/or intentionally misleading the readers, any other legit "evidence" must be called into question.
The SS is corrupt and complicit. My guess is, they'll never admit it 
and we'll never know many/most of the details
and we'll never know many/most of the details
CaptainCrunch
Getting comfortable
Neither the SS snipers that couldn't see him because of the tree nor the SS snipers who were facing the opposite way due to their assigned area of responsibility took shots before the hooter got of 8 rounds. However, the article didn't say the shooter got off 8 rounds before the snipers took action. The article stated the snipers had the opportunity to neutralize the shooter minutes before the shooter fired a shot. So which sniper had the shooter in their scopes for minutes? Was it the snipers who couldn't see him or was it the snipers who were facing the opposite direction?
Not my circus, but as the one video of him running across the roof clearly shows, someone with an elevated view would have easily been able to see him prior to going behind the tree cover, IF we believe the tree cover story.
Of course this doesn’t address the team that was supposed to be covering that roof from the adjoining building.
Of course this doesn’t address the team that was supposed to be covering that roof from the adjoining building.
CaptainCrunch
Getting comfortable
Again, that's not what the article said. The article said "police snipers had the shooter in their scopes for minutes but waited until after the attack at 6:11 PM, after eight shots were made, before finally neutralizing him." Since you believe that claim to be accurate, which sniper do you believe watched the shooter for minutes, including watching him fire 8 shots, before he was neutralized?
I don’t know, because here we are almost a month later and we have no press conference, no public detailed statement, no timeline nothing of substance from SS you seem to want to defend
While we're at it, I dont take your presented "facts" as facts either. Is their testimony to that effect? Have any of the agents testified publicly? Can you point me to those detailed statements? (PS I dont take anything the former discredited SS Director said as it was clear she was lying and resigned)
Short list of other things that would be interesting to know:
SS no-shows at the prep meeting that morning?
Roof- nobody saw him climb up? 8 officers surrounding bldg. at least 2-3 min before shooting looking for him- nobody alerts Stage Detail
Drone offered ...drone denied
No roof coverage
No delay of Trump speaking despite the kid being spotted for 20 minutes as suspicious with rangefinder.
Shooter 3 overseas email accounts?
White Van AZ plates- towed - explosives?
8 shots before they get him?
SS texts? recordings? Non-existant
Top NYT photog, CNN live, never covered before?
Cell phone 8 pings to DC?
Why did a Blackrock affiliate short Trumps company Bigly the day before?
Who was the ATF guy demanding pictures be sent to their Philadelphia office?
Parents? Called to report him missing? House sanitized? Explosive materials delivered to house?
When is the last time we've seen an FBI agent hosing down a crime scene
No public comments or updates, No press conferences
CaptainCrunch
Getting comfortable
You seem to be assigning me opinions I never said I had. I've SS dropped the ball on this. I've also said local police dropped the ball. I'm not saying either is blameless.
What I am saying is with all the information out there we can use to question how in-depth some people were involved, why lie and why purposely mislead people? If you take away the "snipers had him in their scopes for minutes before he pulled the trigger," are there still enough questions to make people wonder? If so, what is gained by adding an outright lie? I say the lie hurts the case. If there's enough evidence without the lie, you make people question any legit evidence by including the lie.