Where I worked is none of your business, I've already encountered your threats and insinuations before by PM, so I have no need or desire to validate anything to you.

I’ve never talked with a police officer who was scared of anything. That speaks volumes.

Scared, No...Silly for giving someone like you my personal information, also No. Your threats by PM also speak volumes.

Guys Stay on topic.

Have mercy. From what i can tell just reading this, a squared away infantry platoon would have locked it down better than the secret service. You don’t play games of power and control with comms. If you can’t learn to use good encrypted comms, you shouldn’t be guarding a presidential candidate. If you don’t have the discipline to keep off the command freq you shouldn’t even be a cop. Everyone should be capable and equipped to perform at least two levels up.

It’s clear to me now.

Single channel comms… like what? A motorolla? SMH

I'm not sure what you are saying, who was misusing the command frequency?

Apparently nobody gets the command frequency. I have been following along yall’s back and forth, with context

There should also be clear rules of engagement, and a weapon pointed in the candidates direction should be a green light, no comms or permission required. Soon as he laid down facing the president with that weapon there is no question. Bad guy.

Okay, I'm not sure anyone can identify the main reason for the fiasco at this point, but sounds like communications was lacking.

I agree 100%, but I also heard a report that the SS Director had changed the Rules of Engagement to hold your fire until fired upon...if so, that may be one of the main causes for failure. Hopefully we get some answers this week from the House Interviews, but I'm not holding my breath.

We will never get the truth, but heads need to roll regardless.

Then the SS director should stand trial in a court of law

Previously, their SOP's have always been that a counter sniper does not need permission to fire. They must see a weapon though.

I have no idea why any changes would have needed to be made. I have never heard of Secret Service shooting anyone, or of an agent ever being shot.

Usually, changes are made after incidents.

Yep. She should be insta-fired for incompetence or she should stand trial. Simple as that.

They scurry around looking for others to throw under the bus, no one is taking responsibility for anything. True colors are shining through.

Surprisingly from this media source, is a fairly accurate description of what takes place in an outdoor protection detail.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...rvice-rally-shooting-missteps-rcna162278

I agree, reports are inconsistent at best. They may have meant 488 feet but I've seen 488yds from different sources. Shouldn't be hard to have a briefing detailing how many agencies were there, their duties/locations and numbers, and who shot the gunman.

It’s like working with foreigners. We can get along great, his English is usually better than mine, until he gets into some trouble. Suddenly there is a language barrier 🤣

I love Benny Johnson, he is very entertaining. But I pretty much refuse to watch any of his coverage of this ordeal. Not news.

Benny defers to the expert's clip. Check out the audio of the shots. I hear the difference.

I heard that burst live when they shot crooks. The counter snipers had bolt guns but it sounds like a semi auto burst takes out the wimp.

She needs to stand trial. She allowed the president to be shot at.

What are the chances that a billionaire secretly hired private security to supplement his secret service detail. There could have been an overwatch of some sort. Waiting for someone to tell me i am paranoid 🤣

What would be the criminal charge?