I'm honored that you find me to be a reputable source. Don't try too hard to be funny is my constructive criticism. Let it be more natural.
Exclusive: Secret Service ramped up security after receiving intel of Iranian plot to assassinate Trump; no known connection to shooting https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/16/politics/iran-plot-assassinate-trump-secret-service/index.html
Don't know how this makes I'm a subject matter expert. A lot of dumb ass snipers who shouldn't in change of managing large scale security events. Look at Chris Kyle as a good example. He was a dumbass you wouldn't want anywhere near a leadership position managing security for large events.
This makes no sense. You can think that someone is power hungry and a terrible leader and not think that assassinating them is the proper response to removing them from office. This must be a Walsh way of thinking of something. I think that Donald Trump has done long term damage to the Presidency and I will not be voting for him in November - but I was (and am) horrified that someone tried to assassinate him. We are not a third world Banana Republic and that is not how we as a country are supposed to act.
If you stick to Occams razor, the ongoing data suggests almost the exact opposite. Occams razor: Mentally ill young, single, white, democrat voting male craftily sneaks around the perimeter, planning for any deviations, manages to get several shots off at a presidential candidate who will likely get elected. Security is super restrictive and has some of the best protection this country offers. We get almost the opposite of this narrative. Instead we get a bizarre Fred and Barney show. Incompetent DEI SS agents, incompetent local police (again, why was the state police not involved in this), an alleged 30 minutes heads up notice, people standing around trying to get the local police to do something, allegedly a team inside the building where the shooter was located. None of this makes sense, not even the conspiracy theories themselves.
Do you have the means to judge incompetence of a security detail being a failure because a woman was hired? What is your experience with security?
The idea there is any type of conspiracy surrounding this assassination attempt is some of the dumbest stuff I've ever read and I've been on Clutchfans over a decade now. By far the most reasonable explanation is some Western PA cops felt they had "secured" that building by arriving, seeing nobody on the roof and contrary to instruction, decided to sit inside the air conditioned building instead of sitting on a hot metal rough in the middle of July. These types of lapses probably happen all the time but security gets away with it because nobody arrives to try and kill the VIP.
Answer the question. For most it's pretty simple. Yes or no. Do you take pamprin on days like today from big pharma? Do you buy gas from big oil? Do you get your news from cable that is basically a Monopoly? Super curious about if you support the values you hide behind.
My God this guy actually gets it. People don't understand how dazed and complacent humans get standing around hot weather in full ppe. "Normalcy bias" kicks in and your desire for some basic comfort combines with your belief of "how often does **** hit the fan anyways? I can be off guard for a few minutes get some shade and everything will be fine". Lapses in security happen all the time for this reason. The desire for some comfort for a couple of minutes assuming **** isn't magically going to hit the fan in just those two minutes of compliancy.
Agreed, they're written into the Constitution. But they're fundamentally anti-democratic in ways that I don't believe the Founders could've envisioned. They didn't know Hawaii or Alaska existed. Here's a little thought exercise: State A has a population of 10. State B has a population of 10. State C has a population of 10,000,000. Why should states A and B have a de facto veto over what the majority of State C wishes? "Because we've always done it this way" isn't a compelling answer. Regarding the electoral college, I would argue that it's also anti-democratic in that it's the only office we decide in this way and modern partisan alignment means that the GOP does not need to appeal to a majority of Americans to win anymore. How is that good for the overall long-term health of the nation?
Do I exist in the modern economy? Yes. Do you defend and support a political party that uses groups of humans that don't have the wealth or political clout to push back as scapegoats for the nation's issues so they can make sure working class white folks are not blaming corporate executives for the problems of the nation? I'm curious. What claim am I making that is making you ask those questions as if I'm a hypocrite? How is me telling you that I don't respect you because you defend a political party that scapegoats powerless groups of people somehow means I'm telling you that you should live off grid and not be involved in our economic system?
Ah, yes, the stock answer for "My ideas aren't popular with most people but I don't need to change them because I can win in other ways"
