Yeah but he is currently running for president so should receive similar protection.

JD Vance had 3 blacked out SUVs arrive at his residence before he was announced as VP pick.

mightv'e already been mentioned where ss said they actually gave trump alot of extra security because information has been that Iran is going to put a hit on him.

Wew3006

Dan Bongino said on his podcast that there is nothing in the law or amendment or whatever (he quoted it, not sure what it is) that says anything about the president getting more protection than another asset they protect. Each asset gets a threat level assessment every few days if not daily, and the amount of protection must meet the threat level. Now I don't always agree with Bongino. He can have some knee jerk reactions. But he is a retired SS guy and has experience in this are for sure.

The whole reason I asked this question is because he talked about this exact subject today. I'm not sure if he's right or wrong. Who knows lol

Another tale of how it went down

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...-looking-at-roof-returing-with-backpack/

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...egedly-spotted-nearly-30-minutes-before/

I am sure there is nothing "in law" that makes that decision; just a decision on allocation of resources based on the importance of a sitting Commander in Chief being a target and the ramifications of a hit. They can certainly change based on threat assessment.
The guy on Fox News explaining that was Chris Swecker, former Assistant Director of the FBI. Pretty sharp guy who seems to tell it straight.(even though he is former FBI?)

https://x.com/DC_Draino/status/1813290490403430856
Some footage after the shooting.

If there is a conspiracy it is the fact that they didn't provide adequate resources to a Former President who is the leading opposition candidate and leading the election polls. Maybe intentionally given that there were allegedly Iran threats which we've known about all along but they obviously ignored some intelligence there. And then at the actual event itself just an uncoordinated mess which displays the incompetence of the SS, and what some are questioning.. was it intentional incompetence.

I honestly don't know the answer to this question:

If the Republican Party had nominated someone like DeSantis who is NOT a former POTUS.... does the candidate get any SS protection? I don't think so. We need to re-think that in this Country apparently they could be easily eliminated is that is actually the case. 20 yr old kid with ZERO training should have by all accounts been wildly successful.

good refrence to where he was on the building. He was shooting in the direction, to the right of the photo
[img]https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content...-blood-917133662.jpg?strip=all&w=960[/img]

They are trying to say he climbed up an A/C unit but I'm not believing that. He would have gone straight up from where that ladder is in the picture . It's the logical place, not some A/C unit on another side of the building. Look at where those units are in other pics, they are exposed and harder to climb(I'm guessing). My 2 cents.

Yes nominees from both parties get SS protection from what I understand. How much is based on the existing threat level.

Doesn't SS protection start once you are the official nominee? Example, Desantis would not have had SS protection until he was the official nominee this week. Trump has protection before this week only because he is a former president.

The way I heard it explained was a "likely nominee" was provided SS protection. The way he described it was if their name is likely to be on the ballot then the qualified. Not sure if that's true or not. That came from Bongino while he was on talking with Don Jr. on the radio. I can't remember what podcast he was on but I don't think it was his.

When I was young I had a friend who's father was a SS agent. Was assigned to Ted Kennedy in 1980.

I read this morning where a local counter sniper on the ground took the first shot at Crooks and hit his rifle, disabling it. First time I have heard that detail.

You might say bad shot or you might say he was told not to shoot the gunman so he did the only thing he could to keep Trump from being murdered and not disobeying orders

So you think the ESU took a 130 yard freehand shot from the ground and was trying to shoot the buffer tube while crooks was in his optics because he didn't wanna disobey orders and kill crooks?

Geez

My guess is just as good as yours and once again neither of us will ever know the truth

Common sense says if the ESU officers plan was not to kill crooks, he wouldn't of taken a shot period. No logical person believes he would try to disable the gun by shooting the buffer tube at that range in that situation. It defies all logic and common sense. So, NO, your guess isn't as good. Has absolutely nothing to do with "never knowing the truth"