First question I have (for American folks), is it common for the BBC to be at a Trump Rally? Kind of thought it odd, yet perhaps it is not.
Then there's the video of the security snipers who seem to be looking directly AT the shooter, but don't fire until he does. I'm not sure, that's what it looks like to me. You can see that the sniper's head pops up - it doesn't swivel or anything to a different direction. If the shooter could see Trump from 150 yards, I think it's more than likely that the sniper could see him, as they probably have the best scopes one can imagine. Maybe he didn't see the shooter climb onto the roof, and his tan camo was blending in with the rooftop?
In this video which is a close up, my impression is that the secret service engages first and then the shooter. He seems to have seen something and shoots and then the shooter shot right afterwards. But that's my very uneducated impression.
t.me
If that's the case, could it be the reason why the shooter 'missed'?
More details to come, however, the official detail sniper seemed to be on target from the one vantage point. Moreover, you don't suddenly swing a gun (did not see it swing) like that on a tripod while looking through a scope to acquire a target, it is just not that fast - you would need to be on scope scanning, and he appeared to back away and then come back on target. Conversely, as Approaching Infinity pointed out, there is a parapet wall possibly that had hidden the shooter. That said, the timing of it all looks odd and needs more data and time.
Someone who has shot AR-15s with a scope should chime in here. Is it plausible to keep your aim solid when firing off 8+ rounds at a fairly rapid pace?
Agree with
@Evan, that an AR-15 is more a shock and awe weapon - more so for its looks as it falls into the 'bad' gun category that plays out on the news, and it is not successively accurate. If the shooter did get 8 shots away, where did they go, what did they hit or who did they hit? - Trump is known and a few others were said to have been injured.
Best we all collect some data and reevaluate, no?
I wrote to you privately because your rudeness is not the topic of the discussion here. As I said, you are pretty much the only person here who uses the "dislike" button. I would suggest to quote the posts you disagree with and present counter-arguments.
"I don't care for you saying ... " is not a counter-argument, as it does not clarify anything.
axj, hlat was correct in pointing out the behind the scenes PM thing you did, it is just not the done thing, and you would or should know that. People make mistakes though, get caught up in the heat of the moment, and he should not have triggered a reference of psychopathy as a rejoinder against you for doing so. As understood, something like this event and its ramifications raises tensions, so we all need to watch it a little and help each other rather than getting into verbal pi..ing matches.
Might have been someone else but I think it was Fletcher Prouty who wrote regarding high profile assassinations that the first thing that should be scrutinized is how security was compromised and by who. Making security services compromised and weakened is the first and most important thing the schemers would have to plan.
Had though the same thing, and it was Prouty. And speaking of who, perhaps the Australian folks can pay attention to the newspapers for headline time-stamps and what was said (Prouty spoke of this too).
Lastly, Butler Pennsylvania is
named after Richard Butler, while a few hours away was the
birthplace of Smedley Butler (not related I think). What happened today in Butler, Smedley understood much about - the racket (aka sewer) behind the scenes, if that is what it was today. Smedley would have helped defend Trump, and would to be sure, be aghast of our political times.
Keep safe, Donald!
nypost.com
