[You're pushing the edge on conspiracies. Keep it up and take a longer timeout -- Staff]

Really doesn't matter what the lie is or how big the lie is. Americans will believe anything. We learnt anything over the past 4-years, it's that.

Is the hearing over?

[Thinly veiled accusations of a conspiracy will draw the same ban as those who express it outright. Take it to the conspiracy thread -- Staff]

[Take the conspiracies to the conspiracy thread when you come back -- Staff]

[Update: we extended your timeout because you have persisted with the conspiracy theories -- Staff]

Here we go again on this thread ...

anybody know if the hearing is over?

My take is that the secret service in Butler was wildy complacent, operating very ad-hoc, and was receiving very little attention or support from leadership.

A lot of the inconsistencies from the hearings wouldn't be due to malice or even choices anyone made at their level. They'd be running CYA and hoping the info they got (day late dollar short) was accurate.

Now again I don't find it hard to believe they created the environment for this to happen. Perhaps even maliciously - disrespect requests of security, shrugging off valid threats, outsourcing way more work than can be handled cohesively - but I don't believe any bad actors were onsite doing anything beyond what they thought was best.

aggiehawg said:

---

A bigger issue to me is that the SAIC (Special Agent in Charge) is still operational and not on leave, according Acting Director Rowe. A Secret Service agent with a can't fail mission, failed miserably resulting in a death, multple casualties including to that of high value protectee.

Just the mental anguish of that alone would affect one's concentration to do their job right now. Take a leave of absence. Or be put on a leave of absence, reassigned to a position not out in the field.

---

Yeah, that was dumbfounding. Put the guy on counterfeiting or something until all the final reports are done.

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

A bigger issue to me is that the SAIC (Special Agent in Charge) is still operational and not on leave, according Acting Director Rowe. A Secret Service agent with a can't fail mission, failed miserably resulting in a death, multple casualties including to that of high value protectee.

Just the mental anguish of that alone would affect one's concentration to do their job right now. Take a leave of absence. Or be put on a leave of absence, reassigned to a position not out in the field.

---

Yeah, that was dumbfounding. Put the guy on counterfeiting or something until all the final reports are done.

---

Actually, I think the SAIC was a woman. Not positive on that but have seen a few references with the pronoun "she." And the ferocity shown by Rowe coming to that lead agent's defense also indicated that to me.

With the way the facts are being dribbled out we may never know what happened.

Obfuscation and trickle truth is what we seeing. It's simply not a priority to find out what happened and prevent it from happening again. We'll be arguing about this 20-years from now.

Path of least resistance here is to chalk this up as a little love tap just to remind folks of who's in charge.

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

A bigger issue to me is that the SAIC (Special Agent in Charge) is still operational and not on leave, according Acting Director Rowe. A Secret Service agent with a can't fail mission, failed miserably resulting in a death, multple casualties including to that of high value protectee.

Just the mental anguish of that alone would affect one's concentration to do their job right now. Take a leave of absence. Or be put on a leave of absence, reassigned to a position not out in the field.

---

Yeah, that was dumbfounding. Put the guy on counterfeiting or something until all the final reports are done.

---

There are increasing layers of dumbfounding. Just dumfounding on top of dumbfounding. Can't wait to see what the next dumfounding thing is. I have lost all faith in the federl government. Every agency, IRS, FBI, CIA, USSS...all of it. Don't care if that makes me weird or a bad American.

[Staff note to the board and not directed at this specific poster: We have been incredibly clear that any discussion, suggestion, or hint of a conspiracy belongs on the conspiracy thread and not this one. It is a derail to posters who are trying to understand and explain the facts. Automatic bans for those who persist, and we will start making them longer bans because we are way past warnings and short bans -- Staff]

[We couldn't have been more clear -- Staff]

My vote goes to fired. There is some serious ass-covering happening. Is it in effort to cover pure blatant incompetence, or is it to cover more intentional negligence as far as how they handled Trump (denying additional help, intentionally halfassed planning, etc) that knowingly would result in substandard protection? One thing we are NOT getting are answers that would help us discern between the two. Let's get it all out there and figure out why this happened how it did. No conspiracy theories. I want facts and we just aren't getting many

It's been more than 2 weeks, zero press conferences, several congressional theatre's acts where ss director defers to FBI investigation and FBI director defers to SS investigation, and only have anonymous media leaks presented, yet we have to stick with the "facts"?

Uhhh ok. I get it, in the days following this we didn't want speculation, but the lack of facts at this point under such an important event unfortunately leads to lack of trust and discussion of if this was on some level allowed to happen intentionally. I don't think that should be considered the same as saying there were multiple shooters or a guy ziplining from the water tower wearing a tuxedo or whatever.

Does that still count?

Testing thread

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It's been more than 2 weeks, zero press conferences, several congressional theatre's acts where ss director defers to FBI investigation and FBI director defers to SS investigation, and only have anonymous media leaks presented, yet we have to stick with the "facts"?

Uhhh ok. I get it, in the days following this we didn't want speculation, but the lack of facts at this point under such an important event unfortunately leads to lack of trust and discussion of if this was on some level allowed to happen intentionally. I don't think that should be considered the same as saying there were multiple shooters or a guy ziplining from the water tower wearing a tuxedo or whatever.

Does that still count?

---

This...also, the federal government wants all of this to just go away. They want people to move onto the next thing. To quit shining the spotlight on them. They want reddit and other similar apps and platforms to ban/remove conversations that question them in any way.

And they want the few that do remain to be considered downright coockoo by all.

Part of me understands that the USSS may be really reluctant to talk about the exact details of what happened, for fear it will make it easier for somebody in the future to know their weaknesses. But this is such an extraordinary event that I hope they would recognize the need to be really open with information and explain what happened to reassure the public that they are still capable of doing their job. The fact that we don't even know the name of the person who was the SAC is troubling to me. That person should either be suspended/fired or be front and center in explaining what happened to congress instead of these DC desk jockeys who weren't there at all. If they are going to remain on-duty, a part of it should be participating in briefings and PCs to explain what happened.

I want to see an investigation into other previous events and hear about exploitable failures that they just got lucky on.

I don't think this was a one off occurrence, only that there was someone there ready to take advantage of the lackadaisical security by the USSS.

was hoping a SS spokesperson would be asked publicly, especially while the video was on loop, if any of their elevated agents or counter-snipers had noticed Crooks running across the roof. ....or if they were looking at porn on their phones.

a lot of those guys are rascals
https://www.politico.com/story/2012/04/secret-service-scandal-rocks-obama-trip-075128

txags92 said:

---

Part of me understands that the USSS may be really reluctant to talk about the exact details of what happened, for fear it will make it easier for somebody in the future to know their weaknesses. But this is such an extraordinary event that I hope they would recognize the need to be really open with information and explain what happened to reassure the public that they are still capable of doing their job. The fact that we don't even know the name of the person who was the SAC is troubling to me. That person should either be suspended/fired or be front and center in explaining what happened to congress instead of these DC desk jockeys who weren't there at all. If they are going to remain on-duty, a part of it should be participating in briefings and PCs to explain what happened.

---

Acting Director Rowe promised the Senators that he will make the SS team at Butler available for them to interview behind closed doors of course very soon. We'll see if that actually happens.

Guitarsoup said:

---

I want to see an investigation into other previous events and hear about exploitable failures that they just got lucky on.

I don't think this was a one off occurrence, only that there was someone there ready to take advantage of the lackadaisical security by the USSS.

---

Would be WILD to find out they kept rooftops 130 yds from clear shot at Obama and Biden wide open too.

By investigation, just curious as to who you are trusting to honestly and properly investigate? Hardly anything ever really happens if the government investigates itself. Because they are so trustworthy.

aggiehawg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Part of me understands that the USSS may be really reluctant to talk about the exact details of what happened, for fear it will make it easier for somebody in the future to know their weaknesses. But this is such an extraordinary event that I hope they would recognize the need to be really open with information and explain what happened to reassure the public that they are still capable of doing their job. The fact that we don't even know the name of the person who was the SAC is troubling to me. That person should either be suspended/fired or be front and center in explaining what happened to congress instead of these DC desk jockeys who weren't there at all. If they are going to remain on-duty, a part of it should be participating in briefings and PCs to explain what happened.

---

Acting Director Rowe promised the Senators that he will make the SS team at Butler available for them to interview behind closed doors of course very soon. We'll see if that actually happens.

---

I understand the reason for wanting to do it behind closed doors, but that just perpetuates the secrecy that allows the conspiracy theories to flourish. What will come out of that is competing leaks from both sides of the political aisle both seeking to use the testimony for political advantage instead of reassurance to the public that the USSS takes their job seriously and wants to learn from mistakes.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It's been more than 2 weeks, zero press conferences, several congressional theatre's acts where ss director defers to FBI investigation and FBI director defers to SS investigation, and only have anonymous media leaks presented, yet we have to stick with the "facts"?

Uhhh ok. I get it, in the days following this we didn't want speculation, but the lack of facts at this point under such an important event unfortunately leads to lack of trust and discussion of if this was on some level allowed to happen intentionally. I don't think that should be considered the same as saying there were multiple shooters or a guy ziplining from the water tower wearing a tuxedo or whatever.

Does that still count?

---

I guess I'm more confused by the "we know nothing" point than anything else. I understand the frustration of not holding a public press conference and hope they do that soon, but they have released a ton of info directly to the media to share (ex. The shooter's entire timeline for that afternoon, based on security footage, dash cams, and witnesses), or through the days of testimony that both groups have done so far. Sure some of that, especially Cheadle, was unhelpful and combative, but to say we only have anonymous media leaks to go off of just isn't factual. You may not want to believe what the FBI and SS have said so far, but only going off of the random internet stories that go viral is how we get blatantly false talking points like the stock dump or the SS deleting communications that have to be shot down repeatedly. It's a never ending cycle.

I will say that there are still a number of key items we don't know that definitely need to come out.
- What and how many requests for additional security were denied in the last year. I did read that the acting director said he'd be providing that.
- How often are people labeled as suspicious and what is the protocol or threshold for stopping the event (they may not want to share this publicly)
- What changes are being made to ensure it doesn't happen again - may also need to be vague here for security purposes. They've already said all comms will be recorded and I'm assuming a streamlined structure for that will be coming for events too.

Like most government groups, the final report will be much slower to come out than anyone in a private sector job could accomplish, but none of that should be surprising.

Quote:

---

I understand the reason for wanting to do it behind closed doors, but that just perpetuates the secrecy that allows the conspiracy theories to flourish. What will come out of that is competing leaks from both sides of the political aisle both seeking to use the testimony for political advantage instead of reassurance to the public that the USSS takes their job seriously and wants to learn from mistakes.

---

Tend to disagree. Conduct longer more thorough interviews behind closed doors first. Find where the discrepancies are and then hold the public hearings with those agents who were on the ground/rooftop.

Guitarsoup said:

---

I want to see an investigation into other previous events and hear about exploitable failures that they just got lucky on.

I don't think this was a one off occurrence, only that there was someone there ready to take advantage of the lackadaisical security by the USSS.

---

I don't think you will see anything like that come from the USSS because it would make it too easy for other actors to identify consistent weaknesses that could be exploited in the future. But I do think it would be useful to understand how frequently they have had similar "suspicious persons" spotted at other events to help understand the reaction at this one.

We are all assuming that the sightings of Crooks should have set off a panic in USSS and Trump should have been prevented from taking the stage or hustled off of it. But if they have an average of 3-5 such sightings at every event that turn out to be nothing, it is easy to see why they might have been complacent about it this time.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It's been more than 2 weeks, zero press conferences, several congressional theatre's acts where ss director defers to FBI investigation and FBI director defers to SS investigation, and only have anonymous media leaks presented, yet we have to stick with the "facts"?

Uhhh ok. I get it, in the days following this we didn't want speculation, but the lack of facts at this point under such an important event unfortunately leads to lack of trust and discussion of if this was on some level allowed to happen intentionally. I don't think that should be considered the same as saying there were multiple shooters or a guy ziplining from the water tower wearing a tuxedo or whatever.

Does that still count?

---

I guess I'm more confused by the "we know nothing" point than anything else. I understand the frustration of not holding a public press conference and hope they do that soon, but they have released a ton of info directly to the media to share (ex. The shooter's entire timeline for that afternoon, based on security footage, dash cams, and witnesses), or through the days of testimony that both groups have done so far. Sure some of that, especially Cheadle, was unhelpful and combative, but to say we only have anonymous media leaks to go off of just isn't factual. You may not want to believe what the FBI and SS have said so far, but only going off of the random internet stories that go viral is how we get blatantly false talking points like the stock dump or the SS deleting communications that have to be shot down repeatedly. It's a never ending cycle.

I will say that there are still a number of key items we don't know that definitely need to come out.
- What and how many requests for additional security were denied in the last year. I did read that the acting director said he'd be providing that.
- How often are people labeled as suspicious and what is the protocol or threshold for stopping the event (they may not want to share this publicly)
- What changes are being made to ensure it doesn't happen again - may also need to be vague here for security purposes. They've already said all comms will be recorded and I'm assuming a streamlined structure for that will be coming for events too.

Like most government groups, the final report will be much slower to come out than anyone in a private sector job could accomplish, but none of that should be surprising.

---

I think one of the problems I can see is that a not insignificant portion of what we do know did not come from USSS, but instead from other officials (local LEO, senators, etc.) who in several cases were releasing the info to directly contradict inaccurate claims coming from the USSS.

txags92 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

I want to see an investigation into other previous events and hear about exploitable failures that they just got lucky on.

I don't think this was a one off occurrence, only that there was someone there ready to take advantage of the lackadaisical security by the USSS.

---

I don't think you will see anything like that come from the USSS because it would make it too easy for other actors to identify consistent weaknesses that could be exploited in the future. But I do think it would be useful to understand how frequently they have had similar "suspicious persons" spotted at other events to help understand the reaction at this one.

We are all assuming that the sightings of Crooks should have set off a panic in USSS and Trump should have been prevented from taking the stage or hustled off of it. But if they have an average of 3-5 such sightings at every event that turn out to be nothing, it is easy to see why they might have been complacent about it this time.

---

If they are actually fixing the problems, there wouldn't be future places to exploit.

By gathering enough video from previous events of all the protectees, a normal person could probably make a really good guess on previous vulnerabilities.

I'll rephrase. Im tired of hearing "news" from "sources familiar with the matter", especially when these sources and headlines seem to change day by day, or contradict what was said earlier.

With what happened, there needs to be someone in either the FBI or Secret Service, holding daily/weekly press conferences, with their badge on the table, telling us from their own mouths exactly what they know and showing evidence for it. That is transparency.

There is no reason for Cheatle to be unable to answer a week later, under oath, in front of Congress, how many shell casings were found on the roof next to the shooters body.

What we are getting is the complete opposite of transparency -- which is why I dont think speculation should be the same as "conspiracy theory", magic bullet, grassy knoll, 3 tramps-type stuff.


I dont think that's a great deal to ask. It happens at almost any other event like this of its kind.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It's been more than 2 weeks, zero press conferences, several congressional theatre's acts where ss director defers to FBI investigation and FBI director defers to SS investigation, and only have anonymous media leaks presented, yet we have to stick with the "facts"?

Uhhh ok. I get it, in the days following this we didn't want speculation, but the lack of facts at this point under such an important event unfortunately leads to lack of trust and discussion of if this was on some level allowed to happen intentionally. I don't think that should be considered the same as saying there were multiple shooters or a guy ziplining from the water tower wearing a tuxedo or whatever.

Does that still count?

---

I guess I'm more confused by the "we know nothing" point than anything else. I understand the frustration of not holding a public press conference and hope they do that soon, but they have released a ton of info directly to the media to share (ex. The shooter's entire timeline for that afternoon, based on security footage, dash cams, and witnesses), or through the days of testimony that both groups have done so far. Sure some of that, especially Cheadle, was unhelpful and combative, but to say we only have anonymous media leaks to go off of just isn't factual. You may not want to believe what the FBI and SS have said so far, but only going off of the random internet stories that go viral is how we get blatantly false talking points like the stock dump or the SS deleting communications that have to be shot down repeatedly. It's a never ending cycle.

I will say that there are still a number of key items we don't know that definitely need to come out.
- What and how many requests for additional security were denied in the last year. I did read that the acting director said he'd be providing that.
- How often are people labeled as suspicious and what is the protocol or threshold for stopping the event (they may not want to share this publicly)
- What changes are being made to ensure it doesn't happen again - may also need to be vague here for security purposes. They've already said all comms will be recorded and I'm assuming a streamlined structure for that will be coming for events too.

Like most government groups, the final report will be much slower to come out than anyone in a private sector job could accomplish, but none of that should be surprising.

---

Where has this been shot down?