Assassination Attempt - Secret Service - DEI

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

DEI…

Well, the asshole on stage is a white male.

The shooter was a white male. Despicable.

The officer who was hoisted to the roof and failed to engage the shooter was male. Coward.

Police that were stationed inside the building upon which the shooter climbed were male. damned clowns.

And we’re worried about an agent damned with her glasses WHILE Trump held them up because he was worried about his shoes?!? Funnily you can see the lifts in his shoes fly out and land on the grass, lol.

Oh noes, DEI!

- Doc

[Some Schmo]

Here's my issue: We are talking about Donald J. Trump here. A man hated by millions of people. A man who has had his nards pulled out of the flames by partisan guardian angels much to the outrage of millions of Americans. A man who loves Vladimir Putin and other dictators. A man whose idea of restraint in public office is that he will only be a dictator on the first day of his presidency. A man who has raped more than one woman. A man who kept classified documents next to the toilet he can't even flush his gargantuan turds down.

Another thing that is entirely possible is that some of the people protecting him may secretly wish him dead themselves, or at least not care so much about this particular assignment. Am I really going to take a bullet for this damned guy?

That makes as much sense as any other explanation for the lapse in security.

ETA: It's a good thing they got the shooter. If they didn't find him, they'd have a hard time finding an American without a motive.

[Marcus]

...And, I think one should assume that the person being guarded may be too stupid or reckless (both apply to Trump) to act in their own security interests, so it is not beyond contemplation that this individual would have to be bearhandled in such a way as to compel cooperation.

Lol, yes. After my last post I was thinking about their training. It would be logical to train both for a protectee who cooperated, but also for one who refused to cooperate. Who knows if a taller agent or in fact an agent of any height with better take-down skills might have been able to prevent someone from sticking their head back up like a sitting duck.

[Res Ipsa]

Seriously, the common practice of mobs of people who have no training or experience second guessing how people act in life or death situations based on a zero pressure viewing of a video is crazy. Leveraging an attempt to kill a political candidate to score political points is a powerful temptation that should be strongly resisted. Didn't we learn anything from jumping to conclusions based on available video in the case of the native drummer and the high school kid?

The House summoning the head of SS for a politically motivated show interrogation is the last thing any serious person would do until the events are as fully understood as they can be.

Seriously - More complete diarrhea being blown from a politically ideological anus.

I am not interested in injecting MAGA or SEXIST or POC into the discussion. If you would like to continue to not consider the elephant in the room, and prefer to focus your thoughts on racist MAGA's, POC, and MOBS, then you can certainly do so. I am not interested. Given the recent attempt to assassinate a former US President, my interest and focus is on other things.

I am interested in having the best qualified people in vital positions like this. Protecting all former US Presidents, as well as the sitting US President in an extremely important and very serious reality.

I am not saying that DEI has had a negative impact on the SS. I am saying that we ought to be able to find out if it did. I think every American citizen should be interested in the results and I think most American citizens would prefer a merit-based system for these positions.

Isn't it about damn time that "we the people" started holding some of these federal institutions accountable and to a level of expectation?

Hi Ceebs,

Respectfully, I disagree. Right now, you have zero evidence that the female agents were any less qualified than any male candidate who was not hired. Zero. To focus on the two female agents and blame DEI when there were also male agents whose performance was arguably worse is identity politics — pure and simple.

Even the most highly competent people can and do make mistakes. Highly trained SS will make mistakes — human beings are not robots that we should expect to perform perfectly, especially when under fire.

Right now, you have no reliable evidence that DEI has anything to do with what you think you are seeing in video clips. You have an ideological objection to DEI, which is perfectly fine. But to leverage your limited understanding of what went on into a conclusion that the women were unqualified for the job is identity politics.

I’ve watched as DEI has become the scapegoat de jure for perceived shortcomings in business and government. It’s the new critical race theory. I’ve heard it proclaimed to be the cause of the accident that took out a bridge to mistakes made by large corporations.

If you are serious about the safety of the President, then blaming DEI for what occurred based on little information is the wrong way to go about it.

Instead of rushing to blame something you are already opposed to, try asking questions like:

What were all the involved agents trained to do in the situation they were faced with?

Did they do what they were trained to do?

If they deviated from their training, why?

Was any deviation from training appropriate under the specific circumstances encountered by the agent?

If the agent did what they were trained to do, did the training result in the appropriate protection?

If not, should the training be modified to improve the resulting protection?

When the agents were assigned to the event, was their training and conduct as an agent consistent with the expectations for an agent assigned to the event?

Is the hiring process resulting in the hiring of individuals who are not qualified to do the job?

If so, how should the hiring process be changed so that unqualified persons are not being hired.

The hiring process is an attempt to use limited information to predict how well a candidate will perform on the job. It is often a less than accurate, highly subjective prediction. There can be a huge mismatch between the qualifications at hiring and the actual performance of the resulting hires.

To assess the impact of a DEI program on the performance of employees, you’d have to compare the performance of folks hired under the program with the performance of employees not hired under the program. Cherry picking a woman or two that you think performed their job inadequately is bias, not evidence-driven analysis.

[ceeboo]

Another thing that is entirely possible is that some of the people protecting him may secretly wish him dead themselves, or at least not care so much about this particular assignment. Am I really going to take a bullet for this damned guy?

Sometimes, not always, I simply cannot believe the suggestions that I read here.

This place can be so dark.

[Some Schmo]

Sometimes, not always, I simply cannot believe the suggestions that I read here.

Well, I can relate to this. Almost everything you post is unbelievable.

[Binger]

I think the only reason we are not beside ourselves with outrage is that most of us would be really relieved if the Donald were gone. I dearly hope no assassination attempt would be the culprit, or anything illegal, but, hey, if he tripped and hit the corner of his fat head on the sharp corner of a marble table? Act of God. I am relieved. So we subconsciously don't want to get worked up over it: "Oh, yeah! I guess that was kind of odd that there was inadequate security at his rally. Oops! Someone ought to look into that!"

I have no idea who "most of us" includes. But it definitely excludes me.

This level of hatred, vitriol and hope for death is beyond the pale. Put me on the record of rejecting this rhetoric entirely. You can enjoy yourselves and listen to Tenacious D in your basements without me.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Another thing that is entirely possible is that some of the people protecting him may secretly wish him dead themselves, or at least not care so much about this particular assignment. Am I really going to take a bullet for this damned guy?

Sometimes, not always, I simply cannot believe the suggestions that I read here.

This place can be so dark.

You’re voting for a rapist. That’s about as dark as it gets.

- Doc

[ceeboo]

Respectfully, I disagree. Right now, you have zero evidence that the female agents were any less qualified than any male candidate who was not hired.

I never said anything like your suggestion implies.

To focus on the two female agents and blame DEI.......

I never said anything like what your suggestion implies.

[ceeboo]

I think the only reason we are not beside ourselves with outrage is that most of us would be really relieved if the Donald were gone. I dearly hope no assassination attempt would be the culprit, or anything illegal, but, hey, if he tripped and hit the corner of his fat head on the sharp corner of a marble table? Act of God. I am relieved. So we subconsciously don't want to get worked up over it: "Oh, yeah! I guess that was kind of odd that there was inadequate security at his rally. Oops! Someone ought to look into that!"

I have no idea who "most of us" includes. But it definitely excludes me.

This level of hatred, vitriol and hope for death is beyond the pale. Put me on the record of rejecting this rhetoric entirely. You can enjoy yourselves and listen to Tenacious D in your basements without me.

Yeah - This is so freaking dark.

I need a break - Ceeboo out!