Rob Clark on IP...Frequently Pt.1

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jfk-assassination-from-the-vault--4127240/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
In these bleak days, humanity is at a breaking point.
Economies are tanking, the woke mob is canceling everything, and
the little guy who's just trying to run a small
business is getting screwed from both ends. But not all
is lost. Amidst the chaos, two men offer up their

(00:25):
voices in the darkness, dropping two thousand pounds laser guided
truth bombs on today's lunacy, introducing the Sirens of Sanity,
David Pridham and l Bradley Sheef.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
Well, Brad, there it is. The theme attributed to our
guests today is gonna be Rob Clark from the Lone
Gunman Podcast. I'm very excited about this. This is a
topic that is near and dear to our hearts here
on the podcast, and it's something that's certainly relevant giving
everything that's going on in this country with the government

(01:14):
trying to kill presidential candidates.

Speaker 3 (01:16):
Yeah, but it's not good. It's not what we're looking for.
We need to get to the bottom of it. Rob
Clark's the guy. Let's bring him in and see what
he has to say. So we are fortunate today here
in the studio audience, as well as for all the
ships at sea and folks listening to the podcast that
we have Rob with us from the Lone Gunman podcast.

(01:37):
Rob is an expert in the JFK assassination. If you've
been listening to the podcast for any period of time
at all, you've heard Rob before. He knows what he's
talking about, he spends time in it, he's not a lunatic,
and so all those things combined to make him the
perfect person to kind of walk us through what happened

(01:58):
in Butler, Pennsylvania with the attempted assassination on former President Trump.
Both David and I are thrilled to have Rob on
and very much looking forward Rob to kind of having
you walk us through this thing, give us your perspective
on it, perhaps fill us in a little bit as
to some of the facts that have come out since

(02:19):
the actual assassination attempt. I was just saying with Rob
as we were getting ready to come on that I
sort of have the average Americans information on it. I
haven't dug into it, I haven't researched it. I've obviously
read the news reports on it. I'm aware of, you know,
the major events that are part of this larger event.

(02:39):
But I'm definitely looking forward to having Rob Clark of
the Lone Gunman podcast get us where we need to
go with this thing so that we can better understand it,
process it, and kind of plug it in as we
head into the election. So Rob, welcome aboard, glad to
have you.

Speaker 4 (02:56):
Thank you, so good to be back, fellas.

Speaker 3 (02:58):
So what do you uh so, what do you think?
How do you want to start this? You want to
kind of walk us through what happened? You want to
set the stage for it. What do you think?

Speaker 4 (03:09):
Yeah, you know, and like like I do on my show,
I kind of want to keep politics and partisanship out
of the discussion.

Speaker 3 (03:17):
You know what, do please do it. We're not trying
to do that. What we're trying to do, David, I
didn't used to. David is a real political scientist and
a political historian. He likes his stuff. I've never really
been into it, but I think it's fair to say
that both of us loathe politics at this point. I mean,
it's just gotten so bad that that's not what we wanted.

(03:37):
This isn't a pro Trump, this isn't an anti Trump,
This isn't you know, a pro Democrat. It's just let's
get into the facts. Of what happened.

Speaker 4 (03:46):
Yeah, so you know when this when this thing first happened,
and with everything that, whether you agree with it or not,
that that the media and the deep date have been
kind of putting Trump through in the last four years,
of the anticipation of this happening him running again. I

(04:07):
honestly said, you know, I'm not surprised, like an attempted
assassination on Donald Trump. I wasn't surprised at all that
had actually happened, you know.

Speaker 2 (04:17):
And then.

Speaker 3 (04:19):
You know, I was.

Speaker 4 (04:20):
I was actually I was dropping my kid off and
I got this alert on my phone. I watched the
video like everybody else, you know, the immediate news after
math if you will, of everything, and you know, the
more you really study all the available video of what
happened that day, because we that's about all we have

(04:43):
to go on other than eye witness testimony, people that
were interviewed immediately after, and then of course a lot
of things have been coming out in the week since
all this happened. But the immediate after math, as you know,
everybody sees this video of Trump talking and honestly, if

(05:03):
he hadn't moved his head at the last second, he
would have been killed. I think it's safe to say that,
you know, And it's sad that that other innocent people
there lost their lives or lost their life as well.
And you hear this narrative of a lone wolf shooter
coming out immediately after this. You know, this guy was

(05:25):
a loner, he was bullied in school, he didn't have
any friends, you know, and and just this whole kind
of narrative, no no social media to speak of, really,
and you know, then then you see a black Rock commercial, which,
of course, you know, black Rock and State Street and

(05:47):
these are these big financial companies that own just about everything,
you know what I mean, And a lot of people
view him as, you know, kind of sinister because why not,
you know, I mean, they they own everything literally, So
you know, it's kind of odd that this guy is
in a commercial or just happens to be in a
commercial for this stuff. So he was obviously talented.

Speaker 3 (06:10):
He kind of lost me there for a second, but
he doesn't have a commercial.

Speaker 2 (06:14):
You don't you should have a Facebook. And then he's
in a black Rock commercial.

Speaker 3 (06:18):
Yeah, well so I didn't know that. So so let
me back up a second. So the shooter crooks right
his he's what was he doing in the commercial? Did
he just happen to be like walking through the center?

Speaker 2 (06:28):
He was?

Speaker 4 (06:30):
He was kind of he was kind of focusing the
commercial was kind of focusing on his uh AP math
and science teacher and whatever he was doing in his
in his high school, and he was just in the
classroom of this teacher, you know, where it focused on
him for a little bit as he was kind of,
you know, paying attention to what his teacher's doing. You know,

(06:52):
he was nothing sinister, But it's just odd, you know
what I mean?

Speaker 3 (06:56):
That is odd. Talk it up and for what it's
I completely agree. The first thing I said, David was
the one that alerted me to the fact that Trump
had gotten shot. And my you know, via tax and
my text right back was I can't believe it's taken
this long, right, I mean that for a guy that's
been that philified, I mean, that is not being compared

(07:17):
to Hitler. They just said he is Hitler, right, They
just said he is going to destroy democracy. That that
you know, he you don't hear his name unless you
also hear a misogynist and racist and so you know,
I don't care where you are politically I mean when
when when a figure, a public figure is painted in
that light, words that you know, even a couple of

(07:39):
years ago, were not bandied around lightly. He didn't just say, hey,
a guy was Adolf Hitler lightly, or that he's a racist,
or that he's a misogynist. So, frankly, I was shocked
that it took this long. I mean, when you if
you internalize that, it almost becomes a moral imperative to
take a shot at the guy, right, I mean, if
you honestly believe he is Adolf Hitler and he's going

(08:00):
to do the kinds of things that Adolf Hitler did,
and you take that in, then I can see why
someone would say, well, we got to get rid of
this guy. So I'm with you. I mean, I can't
believe it took this long.

Speaker 4 (08:13):
Yeah, I mean, there was a definite line of rhetoric
coming from the left in the media following him a
threat to democracy, basically saying he needs to be eliminated,
you know, And these are supposedly legitimate news sources like
CNN and places like that, and they're saying this stuff
on the air with no repercussions whatsoever.

Speaker 2 (08:35):
You know, you know, what's weird. You know what's weird
about that? Just just staying on that for a minute.
You've got the media. This is something Elon Musk tweeted
this out. If you go to Google and Brad, you
know Google, you're aware of the kiss. But you know
how they do. They do these suggested searches, and that's
one way they direct Like it's like forty percent of

(08:56):
the searches. You go and you start typing something and
then it gives you like five or six or ten
options and you just click on it. You don't have
to type the whole thing. And so Google does that.
And so if you go to your Google device and
if you type in President Donald and then you get
your suggested searches, you get President Donald Duck and President

(09:19):
Donald Reagan. Okay, no President Donald Trump. If you put
in assassination of President, you get assassination of President Lincoln
McKinley Garfield, Abraham Lincoln, DM Reagan Garfield. So they are
literally whitewashing a lot of this Trump stuff out of

(09:39):
these Google search results, at least the suggested searches. And
I mean this happened to the in the last election
as well. But this is just this is just more
of the same. I mean, I was in front of
the TV with my in laws when this happened, and
we were watching, and it took about an hour and
a half for MSNBC to even say it was an
assassination attempt. Just crazy.

Speaker 4 (10:01):
Yeah, they wouldn't even acknowledge it. They was like, say,
they said, you know Donald Trump filled today at a rally. Well, well, yeah,
because he got shot in the ear and he got down. Yeah,
technically not an assassination attempt.

Speaker 3 (10:15):
Yeah. Yeah, it's technically not wrong to say that Donald
Trump fell, But you're leaving out a key component when
you leave out the fact that the reason he fell
is because you were shot by a gunman from a roof,
you know, I mean, it's just with a rifle. It's
just it's it's I don't understand what we're trying to do.
And again, you know, it's it's hard not to wander

(10:37):
into the political world. But when we accuse the victim
of an assassination attempt of trying to destroy democracy, but
we refuse to report on the actual events that helped
to define a democracy, I mean, it's just it's it's crazy.

Speaker 2 (10:52):
Well, and then you've got the director of the FBI.
He testified this week last week, and you know, Brad
was in the FBI for a period of time. And
you've got goes up there in front of Congress and
he's not even acknowledging that he was shot. He's saying
he may have been shot by a bullet or it
may have been shrapnel or something else, and it's just

(11:12):
make but he made a point to get that on
the record. It's like, what are we you know, these
are the guys who think that, Well, I'm not going
to get down the road of all the politics of it,
but it's it would seem to me that there are
if you're going to split hairs, that may not be
one you want to split.

Speaker 3 (11:27):
Yeah, I'm not sure that it matters if you got
hit by an actual bullet or something that was put
into motion by a bullet that was aimed at you.
What freaking difference does it make. The guy was trying
to kill Donald Trump. I don't know that we know why,
but it doesn't matter what hit Trump's ear at that point.
So anyway, sorry, go on.

Speaker 4 (11:49):
Right, So you know, after you take all this in
and you you know, you breathe it in and you
think logically to yourself, Okay, well, how is this even
remotely possible in the year twenty twenty four? How can
a guman get that close to a former president who
is running again for president and barely miss killing him

(12:14):
by literally millimeters? You know? And then you start looking
into the Secret Service. Okay, now, you know, immediately after
everything happened, people were pointing out a lot of the
incompetencies of the Secret Service, the counter sniper team, the
female agents. You know, Melissa McCarthy couldn't hold to her

(12:38):
side arm, you know who. You know, these women are
like a foot shorter than Trump. You know, why didn't
the counter sniper team take them out? It appears that
they had him in the sights.

Speaker 3 (12:50):
You know.

Speaker 4 (12:50):
There's all these questions, and you know, of course, immediately
after this happens, we don't know the answers. But then
as the days go on, you start to hear certain things.
You hear from the counter sniper team that, hey, we
had this guy in our sights. They had the building
surrounded a minute before this guy started shooting. Secret Service
would not give us the green light to shoot, you know,

(13:14):
So there's a giant red flag. Crazy, Yeah, and Apparently
the only Secret Service that was there that day were
six of Donald Trump's main guys that he has with
him all the time, because you know, of course past

(13:34):
presidents get afforded the luxury of being protected by the
Secret Service for the rest of their life, you know,
regardless of if you like the man or not. Right,
same thing goes with Bush and Obama and you know
all that they are in Clinton, you know, they all
have Secret Service for life protection. So come to find
out that the rest of the people there that day

(13:57):
were local law enforcement and some requests from the Homeland Security,
and Homeland Security is not really trained in presidential protection
other than hey, you know, shield this guy at all
costs type of thing. But they're they're not, they don't,

(14:18):
that's not their sole focus. Right Well, actually, local law
enforcement was in the building that this Thomas Crooks was
shooting from, and they were they were taking pictures of him.
They were watching him up to an hour before. This
guy's walking around with a rangefinder that he somehow got
in there. He's flying a drone supposedly over everything. You know,

(14:41):
these are giant red flags that you know, they weren't
taken seriously. And then you hear about a local cop
who put that big ladder up and tried to go
up and engage the shooter, who turned the rifle one
to him, and then he's scattered back down the ladder

(15:02):
that they had placed there, which a lot of people
originally thought that the tutor had put there, but his
ladder was actually down on the other building on top
of a shed, because it was only a five foot ladder.
And what he did, he got up there, and he
climbed across the roof and then across the trustle to
the other building, and that's where he was on that route.

(15:24):
And then I saw something I guess was a kind
of one of these rogue local reporter guys actually made
their way up to the top of the building where
Crooks was laid out there on his belly and where
he took the shot from, and he had his cameraman
stand where Trump was standing. And originally I thought from

(15:49):
the vantage point that the counter sniper team maybe they
had a tree in the way possibly which is why
they maybe didn't didn't see this guy. But from the
angle up on that roof, from where the shooter was laying,
what's where Trump was standing, You're talking one hundred, one
hundred and thirty yards. The tree was definitely not in
the way of the counter sniper team. You could see

(16:11):
those roofs behind where Trump would have been standing, and
they had a direct alunt of state.

Speaker 2 (16:16):
Well so, yeah, so the Secret Service, right, the director
of the Secret Service was the woman sheetl who just resigned,
and she goes all through all these histrionics to talk
about sloped roofs and it was too dangerous and it

(16:37):
was clearly just bs right because you see pictures of
the roofs, there's less slope on the roof the shooter
was on than where the counter snipers were exactly. It
didn't make any sense. But what is going on in
this in this world where you and then she spent
the whole hearing not even just evading these questions. I
mean even even AOC who was one of the questioners

(16:58):
of the Congressional hearing, asked one of the best questions
I heard, which was, you know, these these rifles that
the shooter used have have a range of several hundred yards.
Why is it you have given that? Why is it
you have a discernible perimeter of less than you know,
twenty five percent of that.

Speaker 3 (17:17):
And so.

Speaker 2 (17:19):
What I don't understand is the Secret Service and their
unwillingness to cooperate. I guess until you you know, learn
that realized that passed his prologue. Right, and in the
in the JFK assassination, the Secret Service didn't cooperate. They
covered up and destroyed evidence. Right. They did it again

(17:40):
with the whole ARB thing and destroying documents before they
could be turned over. And then on January sixth, they
destroyed all their text messages. Right, So what is it
about these institutions that make them so arrogant that they
think they're not answerable to anybody.

Speaker 4 (17:56):
Well, you know, they had a good run, a good
forty year run since I think Reagan was the last
attempted assassination, and they they you know, they got him
out of there alive forward before that and uh, of
course JFK for that.

Speaker 2 (18:12):
That was squeaky from Brad h with a squirre gun
squirre gun.

Speaker 4 (18:16):
Yeah, and uh, you know, they, like I said, they
had a good forty year run of nothing happening, you know,
no no attempts like blatant attempts like that we know of.
There may have been some that they thwarted that we
didn't know anything about. But uh, you know, as far
as something like this happening, there is just no excuse
for this. They had this weird perimeter set up. It

(18:40):
was shaped like a pac man, and in pac Man's
mouth was this building, and then there's this giant water
tower like right behind it. It would have been a
perfect spot to set up too. And of course all
these conspiracy theories are coming out about second shooter. You know,
you hear about, well he drove there in a Kia,

(19:01):
and then you see other people being arrested in news footage,
and then something about we found the shooter's van and
there was a bomb inside of it. Well wait a minute,
I thought you said he drove a Kia there with
his ladder and his gun. But now there's a van,
and now there's a bomb, and now there's other people
that I see getting arrested here. So what is the
real story? What's going on? And then they just released

(19:25):
the body camera footage from the first responders to get
up to the roof after Crooks was shot, and these
guys are standing around talking asking each other questions like
they have no clue. What in the heck just happened,
you know, what's going on. They don't know what to do.

(19:47):
There's a random atf guy there that seems like he's
in charge of something. But then why is this guy here?
I mean, the more time and the more stuff that
comes out, it's just a lot of it just doesn't
make since well.

Speaker 3 (20:01):
And that's one of the big problems with where we
find ourselves too, just just broadly, I mean, far beyond
the scope of just this assassination attempt, is that because
we don't have a true journalistic group anymore, right, I
mean the mainstream media. Again, you may think this is great,
you may think it's the end of the world. It
doesn't matter for the purposes of the conversation, but they

(20:22):
have clearly driven a stake in the ground as to
where they stand on the narrative. Right, the vast majority
of the mainstream media is opposed to Donald Trump becoming
president for sure, and seem to be opposed to him
just being in existence, right, I mean, just the amount
of vitriol that gets poured out on the guy from

(20:44):
mainstream media outlets. I mean, setting aside, you know, everything
from that on down right social media and just you know,
crazy folks who now have a voice, right, but mainstream
outlets the amount of vitriol that pours out, so you're
not going to get just the facts, right, you just
know that you're not, and so there's not a you know,

(21:07):
there's not a group anymore. Had this happened, you know,
even ten fifteen years ago, he would have just turned
on the news and there would have been someone on
there that you trusted reasonably, who would have said, Okay,
well here's what we know, right, and you would have
had investigative journalists whose sole objective was to get to
the bottom of this thing. Right. They didn't have a

(21:28):
political bent, that didn't have a pre defined narrative that
they needed to squeeze facts into. But conversely, rexually going
to go out and grab those facts and present them
to you and let the chips follow they. Man, I'm
not a big conspiracy guy. And the reason I'm not,
especially when it comes to the government, is that I
worked for the government for over twenty four years, and

(21:49):
I'm just telling you that the government cannot pull off
a conspiracy, right. I mean, it's not a smart enough organization.
The number of people who are more than happy to
tell you a secret if you pay them. The people
that are dumb enough to not even realize they're telling
you something that is supposed to be classified. I mean,

(22:10):
I had the opportunity to work in some very closely
controlled environments in both my military and FBI career, and
the number of times I was just stunned when someone
would walk up to me and present to me something
that was factually correct but they should have never known.
Right now turned out to be okay, because you know,
they were also in the military or also in the FBI,

(22:31):
but they were not inside this group that was supposed
to be the sole group of people who knew this
set of facts or knew about this operation. They would
just walk up and go, hey, you know, I start
talking about it, and it just used to make me laugh. Rob.
I was like, man, we can't keep a thing a secret, right,
And so I'm much more inclined in the direction of

(22:51):
incompetence than I am in the direction of some you know,
deep dark conspiracy. But I also believe that in compence
can be fed, right, that if if you have a direction,
you want something to go right, and you want something
to fail, well, then you put all your incompetent people
over there, and then you can pretty reasonably say, well,

(23:13):
that's not going to go well.

Speaker 2 (23:14):
And then if you have the Warren Commission, right.

Speaker 3 (23:17):
Yeah, exactly, And if you have something that you want
to run tight, well you know who your good people are,
so you put your good people on that, you can
reasonably say, Okay, that's going to run pretty tight. And
now is that a conspiracy?

Speaker 2 (23:29):
Maybe? You know. The only thing I'd say about it's
two things. I don't want to step on a round,
but real quick, I think I think the perception now
is certainly accurate that the media is in the bag
for one party or the other depending on what you watch.
There's no real news anymore. But with Kennedy you always
go back to you compared to the Kennedy thing, the

(23:50):
media was in the bag for the Warren Commission, right.
I mean, CBS aired a multi night television show where
they shill for the Warren Commission and the Warren Commission.
You know, you talk about a conspiracy. Whether it's a
conspiracy to cover it up or do the deed two
different things.

Speaker 3 (24:06):
But you know, the.

Speaker 2 (24:07):
Warren Commission and the House Committee in the seventies, you know,
they were all spoon fed by the Secret Service, and
more importantly, the CIA, and the guys in the CIA
who were spoon feeding the House Committee were the guys
that were running the Cuban operation in the early sixties,
even though they told the House Committee that they weren't. So,

(24:28):
I mean, that's the definition of a conspiracy. Now. It
may be that, you know, the CIA's theory was, Okay,
we just want to cover up our background with Oswald
and this crazy Cuban stuff. We don't want anyone to know.
But I mean, this stuff is sort of trickled out,
but there's no definitive answer on it. And so in
this case, the government is actually, you know, until these

(24:52):
documents started coming out, the government covered up all this stuff.
So maybe it's the CIA that's pretty good, and maybe
they were just covering up the fact they were setting
this whole deal up in the first place. But I mean,
you know, these the media has just been a patsy
for these theories over the years, and it continues to
be the case.

Speaker 4 (25:12):
Yeah, I totally agree. And you know, when you're observing
this from a you know, the one hundred yard view,
it's it's just awfully hard for me to believe that
an agency like the Secret Service could be that incompetent
in several different areas that day, you know, very important areas,

(25:35):
And when you want to I kind of give the
Secret Service a pass when it comes to what happened
with JFK. That was pretty much a no win situation
and everybody was always like, oh, no, they should have
flooded the city. They should have shut down every high
rise building, nailed the windows down, well, did the manhole
covers down? And you know this, that's unrealistic. When you're

(25:58):
talking about a city as big as doubt Us with
the motor K route running right through the middle of it.
You know, you've got thousands of peoples lining the motor
k route. Any of them could have pulled out a
gun at any time and took a shot at this guy.
And like I said, it's unrealistic to place a sniper
on every roof and to run through every building and
nail every window down and manhole cover down. That's just

(26:19):
not realistic ultimately, and maybe it shouldn't have been his call,
but at that point JFK told the Secret Service, I
want to ride. You know, I don't want to top
on the vehicle. I want people to see me. So
that's what they did. They rode like that, and if

(26:40):
you want to call their protection incompetent, that's debatable. You know,
they're on the last leg of getting out of the
middle of Dallas before they hit the highway and make
their way to the Trademark Luncheon, which is where they
were headed to that day in Dallas. Elm Street is

(27:02):
the last basically the last part of the city before
they can speed up, get on the highway and go.
So at this point, you know that you don't have
people riding on the back of the limbo because it's
it's not really safe to go fifty miles an hour
and hanging on to the back of the limousine. You know,

(27:24):
Clint Hill was the only one to really react, you
know at the time, and that's fine, but you know,
I kind of give them a pass that day because
they couldn't do all this free trip inspection and you know,
they could say, hey, well, maybe we shouldn't go this

(27:44):
route because of this, or you know, maybe we shouldn't
go this way because of that. But ultimately, you know,
the Motorcay route was agreed on, and you know, it
all comes down to having the manpower to keep the
president safe. And they just didn't that day in Dallas,
you know, before too, yeah, I mean, they had all

(28:05):
made it, they had almost made it out of the city.
I mean you're literally a couple hundred yards from the
underpass and then you're you're getting on the highway and
at the very last second, somebody took the shots. And
that's what happened, you know. And but when you compare
it to what happened in Butler, when you're comparing crooks

(28:26):
to like an Oswald type of guy, you know, and
it actually came out that he was googling how far
away was Oswald when he shot JFK. I think he
was one hundred and was it one hundred and seventy
maybe not even that much, maybe seventy eight yards and
Brooks was one hundred and thirty. This is totally different circumstance.
You know, Trump wasn't in a vehicle, he wasn't moving,

(28:47):
Brooks wasn't six, you know, six stories in the air.
He was able to be prone with a semi automatic
and a scope, a decent one and a decent rifle.
That's piece of crap. World War two, you know, relic
so Yeah, it's hard to compare the I don't want

(29:10):
to say the Patsy, but the suspects here in an
equal light, and even the Secret Service protection. It's hard
to to correlate to two. You have to you have
to look at them separate, separate things. And to me,
this little rally and Butler, yeah, it's just wasn't the

(29:31):
perimeters we weren't set up right. The communication I've heard
was off. I've heard that they were on different channels
because you have local police, you have sheriff's office there,
you have Homeland Security, Secret Service, and if they're all
on separate channels, you know, and you have bystanders pointing
this guy out like three minutes before the shots, and

(29:52):
you know, nobody can seemingly take this guy out. I mean,
it's just to me, it's more than incompetence. To me,
it's by design. Hm and and and like you said, Brad,
you know is it is it design that way on purpose?

(30:13):
So there's something like this could be allowed to happen
if if there's somebody out there that wants to take
Trump out, you know, it's uh.

Speaker 3 (30:24):
Well, I mean, I like I said, I I hate
to disabuse anyone who believes that the you know, the
government is full of you know, a bunch of sharp folks.
And don't get me wrong, I worked with some wonderful people,
both in the military and in the FBI, just super professional,
very good at their job.

Speaker 2 (30:45):
But you know, for the bread for example, Vince Foster
good Man, I never know him.

Speaker 3 (30:51):
But dead now, so it doesn't matter. But they you know,
I mean, for every one of those, there's two that
you just look at and go, how'd you get here? Right? Like,
I know what process I went through to get here.
It was relatively rigorous. How did you get here? Right?
And and so, like I said, I want to startle anyone,
but the government is not competent. Okay, by and large,

(31:16):
the government is not particularly competent. So I think people
would be shocked at the amount of just sort of
you know, a combination of jackassery and just as you
already pointed out, Rob, you know, forty years it just
kind of being like, wow, you know, I'm just going
to work right, like this is going to be like yesterday,
and it is exceptionally difficult because I've done this. It

(31:38):
is exceptionally difficult to stay sharp day in and day out.
When the thing that you're supposed to do doesn't happen, right,
I mean, I imagine I'm not a trained carpenter, but
I imagine if you were a carpenter and you got told, hey,
sit here because we might need you to drive and
nail and forty years go and you never drive, and

(32:02):
then suddenly someone says, we'll get up here. The house
has fallen down. We need three nails put in, you
know right here immediately that you know you you might
not be at the peak of your ability, right, And
so I'm not trying to make excuses. I mean, clearly
the Secret Service failed. They have one job. It is
to protect their protectees. And when they're doing protection and

(32:24):
obviously the Secret Services criminal investigations and other things that nature.
But when they're when they're trying to invest protect and
protect ee, they have one job, and it is to
prevent this, right and and and they are well trained,
they are well resourced. You know, this is a us
of a outfit great equipment, great training, great training facilities,

(32:45):
plenty of money to back them up for practicing. And
so they are without excuse, don't get me wrong. And
I think any Secret Service agent would tell you that
would just say we we we fail, we did not
do well. But I just see a nation of all
kinds of things. I mean, as you pointed out, Trump's
protection detail, at best is not the is not the

(33:07):
B team, it's not the C team. It's not even
the D team, right, because A, B, C, and D
are on the President, the vice president, the first lady.

Speaker 2 (33:15):
And then whatever we call first fella, first, first dude,
whatever he is, second fellow.

Speaker 3 (33:21):
At best, the fifth team is on Trump.

Speaker 2 (33:26):
Well what about this, what about the fact that this
is sort of a little bit off point? But if
you look at the assassins of presidents, right, and maybe
it's just me, but when you look at the assassins
of president.

Speaker 3 (33:40):
I didn't know you were assassin of presidents.

Speaker 2 (33:41):
Now I'm just someone looking at them. Oh okay, But
when you look at them, there's a commonality.

Speaker 3 (33:49):
Right.

Speaker 2 (33:50):
So you got Thomas Matthew Crooks, Lee Harvey Oswald, John
Willis Booth, they all have James L.

Speaker 3 (33:56):
Ray.

Speaker 2 (33:56):
Right, you didn't kill a president, but you know they
all have these three names. So why not start there
and sort of triangulate your approach, and you know you're
not going to check everybody at the thing.

Speaker 3 (34:08):
Just arrest everybody that's got three names.

Speaker 2 (34:10):
That's got that goes by three names. B. So you
know you have three names, but you know you're you're
known Brad Shechef, it's not or el Bred and maybe
you should be checked. But but start there right because
it's is it a coincidence? And then John Hickley, John
Hickley has two names, doesn't pull it off. Now this

(34:30):
guy didn't pull it off either, then maybe there's a
there's a flaw at that point.

Speaker 3 (34:36):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (34:36):
I think the whole the whole three name thing is
just to distinguish that person as much as you can
from anybody else with the same name, you know. And
instance like this, because you know, I don't know how
many Thomas crookstore are out here in the world, but uh,

(34:58):
you know, say there's two other ones that happened to
live around Pittsburgh or that area of Pennsylvania, and you
hear that Thomas Crooks just shot took a shot at,
you know, Donald Trump, and you immediately think, well, oh
my god, I know it's Thomas Crooks, you know, and
things get way out of hand really fast. It's when
you know, when it comes to something like that, so

(35:18):
I think the three name thing is that is an
attempt at distinguishing these people as much as possible.

Speaker 2 (35:27):
You know, John Hinckley, then why was he not John
Wardnock hit Hinckley. Why not why John Hinckley and Sir
Hans Sir Hen could have been sir and Sir Hann True.

Speaker 4 (35:35):
Yeah, yeah. They don't do it for everybody, but the
majority of them, And I think it predicates one, you know,
the first bits of news that actually come out from
whatever source it may be. They may choose to do that,
or maybe some didn't do that, but yeah, you have
a good point there.

Speaker 3 (35:54):
Well, there you have it. That's just part one, folks,
of our discussion with Rob Clark. As we say every week,
we will be back next week, but we're certainly going
to be back next week because it'll be part two,
so make sure that you do not miss it. We'll
wrap up with Rob Clark, we'll get to the bottom
of this thing, and we'll do it as we always do,

(36:17):
with class, with style, with dignity right here on IP frequently.

Speaker 1 (36:23):
This has been IP frequently, once again clearing a forest
of lies with the machete of truth.

Speaker 3 (36:32):
You're welcome