quote:

The good ones are still out there but they’re rapidly being put out to pasture and are rarely, if ever, assigned anything more than mundane tasks.

I think some shade should be thrown here.

I'm sick and tired of hearing from government (especially state workers in my area) employees that they're just holding on for a retirement...or they're a good one in a bad position or place. At what point do they just admit they have NO SPINE, have compromised their integrity and ethics, IF they ever had any to begin with. It's the "I'm just doing what I'm told" or "I'm just a soldier following orders" argument...and it's pretty lame. There is a cost to doing what's right, and standing up to those who don't around you. I get that. Just admit they're too weak or selfish to bear that cost. Be honest...I can live with that.

quote:

Originally posted by Tn226:

quote:

stopped agreeing with the "There are still a lot of good agents in the field" statement quite a while ago. T

I’ll disagree just a bit.

I have a relative about to retire from FBI. Was an instructor at the academy for several years. The differences between the younger newer agents and those of the older generation are disturbing and deep. You can blame DEI for some of it, a dumbing down of the population for some of it, gen x work ethics, such as they are, for some.

The good ones are still out there but they’re rapidly being put out to pasture and are rarely, if ever, assigned anything more than mundane tasks.

There 'may' be some good ones, but are there 'a lot' of them...That's an unknown. Regardless, their track record speaks for itself, and sucks abysmally! Therefore, I'm not inclined to trust ANY of them!

"Shooter's gun had 'collapsible stock,' which is easy to conceal

The weapon used by the gunman had a "collapsible stock," meaning Thomas Matthew Crooks could easily conceal the gun at the rally, FBI Director Christopher Wray told the House Judiciary Committee.

"The weapon had a collapsible stock, which could explain why it might have been less easy for people to observe," he said." Link

That's right up there with the sloped roof.

One, plenty of people saw the guy and pointed out he had a gun.

Two, I'm guessing everyone that should have had a rifle at the rally had one with a collapsible stock. From the pictures and videos, the Secret Service Counter Snipers, the Secret Service Counter Assualt Team, and local law enforcement all had rifles with collapsible stocks. Anybody have trouble spotting those guys?

What is it with these Director level people that cannot speak intelligently about the topic at hand?

Two questions everyone wants answered:

1. Why, when there were multiple opportunities to do so, wasn't the shooter engaged by law enforcement sooner?

2. Why wasn't someone watching that particular roof?

It's almost two weeks now. How many people would one have to talk to to answers those questions? A dozen?

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
What is it with these Director level people that cannot speak intelligently about the topic at hand?

I can't address that one within the context of government organizations, but in some of my past experiences in the corporate world it's because the director (big office and comfy chairs) level people have never been hands-on at the production (get the tools and git-r-done) level.

Just my opinion....

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
"Shooter's gun had 'collapsible stock,' which is easy to conceal...

With a barrel ≥ 16" and an overall length, even with a collapsible stock, of ≥ 28".

Sure.

Its not like a collapsible stock is Romulan cloaking technology.

He said it because it was one of the five common features making regular AR pattern rifles into magically more dangerous Joe Biden "assault weapons."

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="540" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XwBygHmIZ6c" title="Bodycam Footage from Moments After Trump Assassination Attempt" width="960"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

At 10:24.

That my friends shows it was not very far to the stage nor is it that hard a shot, even with an unmagnified optic.

I am more convinced that ever that President Trump survived through divine intervention.

quote:

When questioned by committee chairman Jim Jordan as to whether the FBI had accounted for all of the bullets at the scene, Wray said that eight spent rounds were recovered from the rooftop of the building from which the gunman opened fire.

That is not what Wray said. Wray said 8 cartridges were recovered on the rooftop, not 8 casings.

The question was asked: Did crooks fire 8 shots? The answer was "We recovered 8 cartridges on the roof. Wray knows the difference between a cartridge and a casing. He was very specific in his answer.

https://x.com/thevivafrei/status/1816137633065554360

quote:

Wray knows the difference between a cartridge and a casing.

You sir have way more confidence in Wray's ability and knowledge than I do...

A few things of note from the video Para posted above:

1. The guy with the body cam counted 8 empty cases on the roof.

2. That tree blocked the view of SS Counter Snipers on the north building.

3. The giant ladder was in fact not there when the shooter got on the roof.

4. Somebody really needs to talk to Beaver County Sniper, Greg. He’s in the second window with a clear view of the roof and snapped at least two pictures of the shooter before the shooter got on the roof.

I’m really wondering about the ladder on the other building. Where did that come from and was it there before the shooter got on the roof?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: trapper189,

I only watch bits of the testimonies before Congress, but from Wray’s comments I learned a new firearms-related word usage: “Cartridge” now means a fired and empty casing. Now that it has entered the public record, I imagine that’s how we can expect it to be used forevermore.

I drafted the above before the other posts about the subject, and I wouldn’t bet the rent that Wray knows the difference between a cartridge and a casing. If he does, he probably misspoke. Either way, though, it won’t matter: fired cases are now “cartridges.”

That will be just one more example of how firearms-related terminology gets changed because someone simply did not think things through. The most recent previous example I am aware of is the convention that flat is the opposite of curved.

The video Para posted certainly shows no one having issues with the “sloped roof”.

Although blurred out in the video, Crooks’s noggin appears to be mostly (too) intact.

If he was killed with a round fired from a sniper’s rifle with mostly direct hit and assuming a caliber larger than 5.56, wouldn’t there be more ‘splatter’ in the area around where his head is?

I guess the body must be planted. The real shooter, a super-secret shadowy government guy, raised from a foundling by the CIA, is the real shooter and he's gotten clean away. A billion dollars they paid him, or so I hear from my reliable, super-confidential sources.

Yep

Clearly, a deep conspiracy, wouldn't you say, Cookster? There's no doubt about it. All the clues are there.

Yep

quote:

Originally posted by Cookster:
Although blurred out in the video, Crooks’s noggin appears to be mostly (too) intact.

If he was killed with a round fired from a sniper’s rifle with mostly direct hit and assuming a caliber larger than 5.56, wouldn’t there be more ‘splatter’ in the area around where his head is?

There was a YUGE blood trail going downhill from the body.

Para,The rumor I'm hearing this is a repeat of 1963 staged by the Cigarette Smoking Man, aka Carl Gerhard Busch, apparently the Lone Gunmen are hot on the trail and "the truth is out there."

quote:

Originally posted by Shaql:
Wray knows the difference between a cartridge and a casing.

Yes, he probably does have that knowledge. What he doesn't have is one ounce of integrity. If he said the sky is blue, I would go outside and check it myself.

I don't believe one word that comes out of his mouth, not one.


.

Hi Para,

I only want to know the truth of what happened that day, and the events that led up to it which allowed it to happen.

Respectfully,

Rob

quote:

Originally posted by Cookster:
If he was killed with a round fired from a sniper’s rifle with mostly direct hit and assuming a caliber larger than 5.56, wouldn’t there be more ‘splatter’ in the area around where his head is?

From page 1002:

quote:

Originally posted by Chowser:

Note the ragged flesh visible at the back of the neck just below the ear. That’s where a significant blood flow onto the nose originates. Although it’s just one image that doesn’t show the exit wound clearly, that degree of damage seems completely reasonable based on what has been reported about the bullet the USSS sniper fired.

If, as reported, the bullet was a 190 grain nonexpanding open tip match-type projectile, its energy transfer and wounding effects wouldn’t have reached maximum levels until the bullet started to tumble as it traveled through the head. Based on how similar, but lighter, bullets perform in ballistic test medium (gelatin), the bullet probably traveled most of the way through the cranium before tumbling occurred—if then.

The shot was obviously effective despite however the bullet performed, but of various bullet types, calibers, and velocities that might be involved in similar head shots, I would expect a 190 grain OTM projectile at 300 Winchester Magnum velocities at 190 yards to produce among the least dramatic visible wounding effects.

And as for visible splatter, the killer’s position when shot would probably have meant that much of the ejected blood and tissue from the head would have ended up on his back.

The area I’m referring to.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund,

quote:

Originally posted by Tn226:

quote:

stopped agreeing with the "There are still a lot of good agents in the field" statement quite a while ago. T

I’ll disagree just a bit.

I have a relative about to retire from FBI. Was an instructor at the academy for several years. The differences between the younger newer agents and those of the older generation are disturbing and deep. You can blame DEI for some of it, a dumbing down of the population for some of it, gen x work ethics, such as they are, for some.

The good ones are still out there but they’re rapidly being put out to pasture and are rarely, if ever, assigned anything more than mundane tasks.

Welcome to Law Enforcement and States / District Attorneys / Judges offices all over!
Put a social justice warrior in charge, he/she/it puts their people in the right places, promote some like-minded individuals willing to tow (or toe) the company line... It doesn't take long, but in a few years, now you have different layers of bullshit you have to get through to turn the ship around.
Local, County, State, Federal... It's been happening for a few years now.

As far as the promotions, or should I say "Jamming them up the ladder"; competency be damned!
They promote "My Guy / Girl". Based on loyalty (not that there's anything wrong with having a loyal person) and affiliation to whatever group, and not on important things such as skill, competency, work ethic.


"We're going to promote "XYZ", because "XYZ" thinks like us, and will do what we tell them to do without question. Hell, they're not smart enough to think on their own, we'll tell them what to think!"

Then expand the above statement to "X, Y and X", and see how fast things change.