• What about the secret service sniper that released that he was ordered not to kill the shooter until after he had fired at former president Trump?

I believe you are referring to the Willis tweet if I am not mistaken. Let’s look at that one with open eyes and a questioning mind. First, he claims the head of the SS was the “shoot / no shoot” decision maker, meaning Director Kimberly Cheatle. That is HIGHLY unlikely. Why? He would more than likely refer to her as “Director” since that is her title…not “head of the secret service”. Next, unless there was some HUGE overriding reason, the Director would not be the “shoot / no shoot” decision maker. It would be left in the hands of the sniper, or, in the hands of the on-scene person directly in-charge of the event detail (Incident Commander) or the person in charge of on-scene Operations.

He also claims he was arrested but doesn’t state who did the arrest or on what charges. The SS would not have arrested him, that would create a public record for one, but the chances of the SS getting clearance to do so would have required developing what to charge him with. That would be no simple task and would probably require DOJ interaction, or, at the very least SS lawyers. Also, the chances of the SS arresting one of their own that quickly would be unlikely. He claims he was interviewed by the FBI, probably true since they would want his story/information to further their investigation. He also claims he was fired. Not really possible at that point. To fire a Federal employee takes some doing and is almost impossible…and truly impossible to do so quickly.

To me this story sounds about 90% untrue by reason, logic, and factual evidence…as I am aware of such. The final tidbit that makes me question this is the fact it happened so quickly and so publicly. You have to remember, that for the most part, the federal government is very, very incompetent. That is one of the reasons it takes them so long to do just about anything. And the amount of scrutiny that this would bring, think ‘publicity’, would be damning to say the least. It would be WAY too clear that this was an ‘inside job’…and I don’t see TPTB making such a blunder.

Now, could it be true? I give it a 10% chance that it is entirely true, or 15% chance that it is partially, true…but no more than that in either case.

• Why didn’t that local officer kill the shooter when he had a chance?

I believe you are referring to the report that Butler Township officers received word that there was a man on the roof. Reports state that he was hoisted to the roof by another officer but that officer was targeted by the shooter. The officer then retreated for his own safety. The shooter then at that point opened fire on Trump. At least that is my understanding of the report/story.

Here is my take:

If Butler Township officers received those reports, protocol would have them relay that information to the Unified Command Command Post (CP). At that point the communications people would have put that out over the air and the SS snipers (technically called counter-snipers) would have been in the loop on that notification. The SS snipers would have immediately recon’d the building’s roof, and seeing a man with a gun would have engaged. I can’t imagine that Butler Township officers, once receiving the reports would not have reported it up-line.

Also, the retreating officer did what 99% of all officers would have done…retreated under the threat of his own life. Only the most dedicated, the most trained, and the most committed officers would have engaged at the threat of their own life.

Here is the kicker…let’s say this is all true for this conversation. If the reports were actually given to the Butler Township officers, and they reported it up-line, and the CP relayed that information over their ComNet, and the SS snipers received the broadcast, and the SS snipers saw the shooter engaging the Butler Township officer, the SS snipers would have fired right then and there killing the shooter and not waiting on a “shoot / no shoot” from command. Right?

So work it backwards…we know the SS sniper did not engage the shooter until after the shooter fired multiple rounds. Meaning; 1) they didn’t see the shooter/officer engagement, or 2) didn’t receive any notification of the shooter on the roof, 3) or??? Next; 1) the CP didn’t receive the report from the Butler Township officers and therefore didn’t put it out over the ComNet, or 2) the CP received the report from the Butler Township officers but chose to not put it out over the ComNet for whatever reasons. Next; 1) the Butler Township officers never received the report(s) from civilians, or 2) they received the report(s) and chose not to relay the info up-line and investigate the situation themselves, or 3) they received the report(s), relayed it up-line and then investigated.

Remember, I was a federal employee for 16 years, I’ve worked hundreds of incidents with other federal employees, including incidents where state and local resources were involved. My experience tells me that incompetence ruled that day in this situation, if it is true; meaning, the sheer amount of incompetence in these situations in mind-blowing. Also, the theory of Occam’s Razor points to incompetence as the likely reason this huge lapse of action/judgment happened.

However, this question must be considered…Is the story itself true or not to begin with? Also, are there parts of the story true and other parts not true?

Related Articles:

• Attempted Assassination of Trump: Q&A – Part #2
• Attempted assassination of Trump: Q&A – Part #1
• Attempted Assassination of Trump: How is this to blame on Biden?
• Attempted assassination of Trump…first info and questions
• Trump Assassination Attempt
• Situational Awareness: Part 6 – Dig It !
• Out-Of-The-Loop

Q & A Time…Ask me a question or send me a message…

 2009 - 2024 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved
No reproduction or other use of this content
without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com
No legal, economic, or financial advice is given, no expertise to be assumed.
See Content Use Policy for more information.</p