Secret Service wants Trump’s campaign to not schedule large outdoor rallies and events

When Kennedy was shot, President's were no longer allowed to travel in open-top cars.

When Reagan was shot, protocol was changed so people could only get near the President in controlled circumstances.

When these things unfortunately happen, the Secret Service changes their protocol so they don't happen again.

Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

So because they can't do the job they are supposed to do, Trump has to change his campaigning and not do his signature rallies? How about instead the Secret Service do their job like they are supposed to. No more DEI hires. Hire people who know what the hell they are doing instead.

I saw a video on TV news last night and the reporter was asking rally goers what they thought about the events. The reporter interviewed a few people in the crowd who were exmilitary and they all said that they instantly knew the scene was not secure and they couldn't believe the lax security.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Exactly, the scene was not secure because outdoor spaces is where most political assassinations happen and that is the main reason for failures, not DEI.

originally posted by: quintessentone
the scene was not secure because outdoor spaces is where most political assassinations happen and that is the main reason for failures, not DEI.

The scene was not secure because Secret Service FAILED to do their job, and they failed because their leader was a DEI hire who didn't know what the hell she was doing. She got the job because she had a vagina. Common sense said that the building the assassin used should have been covered, but the Secret Service didn't do it. It wasn't too hard to do. Even the 'common folk' at the rally knew it.

Cling to the DEI cult all you want. Doesn't change the fact that the leadership of the Secret Service was a DEI hire and she failed at her job.

a reply to: FlyersFan

As I stated before, those tall SS male agents also didn't cover Trump fully, where's the merit for those non-DEI hires?

My point is no protection agency would be able to effectively deal with fully securing large outdoor spaces, it's an impossible ask.

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

... because the Secret Service isn't capable of doing their job. He didn't say outdoor rallies are bad. He is just stopping for the near future because the Secret Service is so incapable that it can't be done. He has no choice but to not do them for now.

I'm sure this makes the left very happy. They don't like the optics showing 30,000 and 40,000 and 50,000 people all not buying the left wing bullcrap rhetoric and all around Trump wanting him to be POTUS. Especially when the left can't manage to get more than a few hundred people in a school gymnasium.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump agrees it's a bad idea to hold large outdoor rallies.

www.nbcnews.com...

... because the Secret Service isn't capable of doing their job. He didn't say outdoor rallies are bad. He is just stopping for the near future because the Secret Service is so incapable that it can't be done. He has no choice but to not do them for now.

I'm sure this makes the left very happy. They don't like the optics showing 30,000 and 40,000 and 50,000 people all not buying the left wing bullcrap rhetoric and all around Trump wanting him to be POTUS. Especially when the left can't manage to get more than a few hundred people in a school gymnasium.

He obviously agreed with their reasons, that being, large outdoor spaces cannot be fully secured, it's an impossible ask.

originally posted by: quintessentone
My point is no protection agency would be able to effectively deal with fully securing large outdoor spaces, it's an impossible ask.

No it's not impossible. That building the shooter was on was an obvious place they should have secured. They didn't do it. They failed. It's just that simple.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
My point is no protection agency would be able to effectively deal with fully securing large outdoor spaces, it's an impossible ask.

No it's not impossible. That building the shooter was on was an obvious place they should have secured. They didn't do it. They failed. It's just that simple.

It's not just that simple and you know it.

originally posted by: putnam6
The Secret Service officials encouraging Donald Trump’s campaign to stop scheduling large outdoor rallies and events

Perfect! NOT! Max venue size (14) persons, and NO media coverage! That's the ticket!

He has had dozens and dozens of campaign events outdoors since 2015 and now they want him to stop because of thier failures in Butler Pa?

Hey...you know the saying..."Never let a good CRISIS go to waste!"

Not sure what the best answer here is but we know DJT can get huge crowds outdoors I don't think the DNC likes the optics of it all, DJT gets huge crowds let's see if Harris can draw well.

That's exactly what this is all about! Try anything, and everything, possible to keep Trump from the people, to change the 'optics' (hate that word, BTW) of people's perception. "You're just TOO popular, Mr. Trump, we HAVE to do something about that!!!"

Are we going to have to build him a bulletproof golf cart, let him ride to the stage, and get in a bulletproof box?

Hey, they built one for the Pope...The Popemobile. Now we can have..."The Trumpmobile"! I like it...I like it A LOT!!

needless to say, I am skeptical AH

No reason for any skepticism here! Nothing going on here at all. Move along now. You Conspiracy Theorists are such a hoot! I've got some tinfoil in my truck if you need it.

/extreme sarcasm

a reply to: quintessentone

A few days ago, someone here on ATS posted a picture of the Trump security perimeter. It was a roughly circular shape, with a pie shaped wedge missing out of it.

You'll never guess what building was in the pie shaped perimeter exclusion! Yep, the exact building where the shooter was! Hmmmmmm...

I'll have to go back and see if I can find that picture. If I do, I'll link it here.

edit...Here it is...

originally posted by: quintessentone
It's not just that simple and you know it.

when people make a statement and then say .. 'and you know it'... that's obnoxious.
And it's a failing argument.

NO .. no one knows any such thing.
The Secret Service failed. Their leader was a DEI hire and she failed.
If the Secret Service had hired someone based on merit and ability instead of
on them having a vagina ... this might not have happened.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
It's not just that simple and you know it.

when people make a statement and then say .. 'and you know it'... that's obnoxious.
And it's a failing argument.

NO .. no one knows any such thing.
The Secret Service failed. Their leader was a DEI hire and she failed.
If the Secret Service had hired someone based on merit and ability instead of
on them having a vagina ... this might not have happened.

Did it ever occur to you that the shooter could have attached grenades to his drone instead?

Outdoor venues offer countless ways to do assassinations.

One more point, I was listening to a retired military special ops. man give his take on this and he said it would not have mattered whether any size or shape of person was in front of Trump protecting(?) him because the bullets of that AR15 would have, I don't recall his description of the aftermath, but let's just say human bodies around him would not have saved him.

WARNING GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIVE CONTENT IN VIDEO:

@ Butler, members of the public tried to draw LE attention to the shooter on the roof.

What happens if ordinary event attendees work to guard the area? I'm not suggesting people turn up ready for a shoot-out but what is the position if people tried a citizen's arrest of anyone acting in openly suspicious ways, such as Crook?

What if Bikers for Trump were out in large numbers? What is the likelihood SS would perceive them a threat? Would loonies, Trump haters and professional or indoctrinated potential assassins perceive them a threat or deterrent?


I suspect anyone or group taking on responsibility for protecting Trump might face arrest but what is the legal position?

a reply to: FlyersFan

She had 24 years experience as a Secret Service agent and two years experience as Pepsi's head of global security.

On paper, which part of her professional history makes her unfit for the job?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: FlyersFan

She had 24 years experience as a Secret Service agent and two years experience as Pepsi's head of global security.

On paper, which part of her professional history makes her unfit for the job?

Exactly, and the other leaders of other agencies which refused to answer questions were not asked to resign, so there is a double standard.

The shortsightedness of all government leaders/officials is shocking in regards to how this agency and it's agents have an almost impossible mission.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: FlyersFan

She had 24 years experience as a Secret Service agent and two years experience as Pepsi's head of global security.

On paper, which part of her professional history makes her unfit for the job?

Paper resume was fine. Her leadership is the issue. If she had quality leadership, she would have the right people in place to carry out the mission as intended, She didn't as proven by the fact that they did not.

a reply to: Threadbarer


She was a DEI Pepsi Hire too

The ultimate objective is to become a company that's focused on equity and genuinely inclusive.

WEF and the Great Reset tactics
The business case for diversity in the workplace is now overwhelming
Apr 29, 2019

Brilliant. So we have a USSS that says this now after they allowed the damage to begin with. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Guess who's still running the USSS? Yup, same people that was running the USSS since Jan 2021.

Evidence is showing the USSS knew the shooter was there before Trump was even on the stage. Explain THAT