In a recent conversation on Fox Business Network, former interior secretary Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-MT) of the esteemed Trump administration, unraveled an interesting hypothesis. He raised questions about whether the attempted attack on President Trump was a stand-alone incident or part of a broader and potentially more sinister scheme. While there is no direct evidence linking the attacker to a larger conspiracy, Zinke’s theory originates from the noticeable lack of competence and multiple breaches in protocol from the Secret Service.
‘Here is what we need to understand,’ Zinke said on ‘Mornings with Maria.’ He clarified his viewpoint: ‘Negligence is apparent, incompetence is clear, and breaches occurred, in terms of communications, protocol follow-ups etc. But what’s important to determine is; was this negligence deliberate and informed? This is the real question. Was President Trump deliberately placed in a vulnerable position by allowing the security protocols to crumble, ultimately enabling this incident?’
Zinke further explicated his line of thought into a more ominous possibility: ‘If it was intentional, and you were certain that your lack of security would place the president in direct danger, then it changes the context completely. We move from an assassination attempt to a larger potential plot. That’s a huge shift in perspective – from an isolated attempt to a conspired plot – and this is where we need to find our answer.’
Kimberly Cheatle, the then director of the Secret Service, took the action that many would consider honorable. She resigned the following Tuesday after the incident, admitting that she bore ‘full responsibility’ for what she termed as ‘the most significant operational failure of the Secret Service in decades.’
Just days before the unfortunate lapse in security, it was noted that the Trump campaign’s plea for additional measures had been denied by the agency under consideration of staffing constraints. This raises questions about prioritization of resources and the subsequent decision-making process.
Should there have been a more careful evaluation of the potential risks before dismissing a request for increased protection? This denial can be viewed as a historical moment of deviation, one that put the President’s life at increased risk and leading to a large-scale investigation into the security protocols.
The larger, underlying issue, brought forward by Zinke’s hypothesis points to a crucial factor – the willful endangerment of the President’s life by individuals with inside knowledge of his security lapses. In such a scenario, those involved would be fully aware that their lax security measures could create a direct threat to the President.
This hypothesis encourages us to differentiate between an assassination attempt – which is, in essence, an act born from a single, irrational plan; and a plot – an act that’s systematically designed and undergone to harm the President. This leads us to question whether the negligence was purposeful, and if so, what the motives might be.
Centred around this incident also arises the critical issue of responsibilities within the Secret Service, which is one of the most crucial institutions tasked with ensuring the safety and security of our leaders. If there were flaws in the operational management, then it becomes necessary to delve into these lapses and rectify them as swiftly as possible to avoid such detrimental occurrences in the future.
The implications of this security failure aren’t just around the safety of one individual but speak to the overall integrity, effectiveness, and accountability of the Secret Service. This incident is not merely a lapse in security for President Trump alone, but actually carries a stark message – when the lives of our leaders are at stake, complacency can be catastrophic.
What transpired that day is indeed regrettable, but it offers a powerful lesson: even the minutest lapse in a high-profile operation such as this can have potentially deadly consequences. If the incident was born out of willful negligence, it would be a significant failing on the part of someone within this crucial institution.
Should such a grave situation arise, it would demand rigorous investigation and action. Could these failures in security have been acts of deliberate negligence or an unfortunate lack of foresight? This is a critical inquiry that needs addressing, to ensure the safety of our leadership and the credibility of our security agencies.
The viability of Zinke’s hypothesis puts into light, the importance of a strict, fastidious, and unyielding security scaffold around our highest seats of power. Any negligence, intended or otherwise, cannot only compromise the safety of the individuals protected but also upset the nation’s sense of security.
Incidentally, it forces us to reflect on the enormous trust we lay in the hands of our protective services and, simultaneously, the magnitude of the responsibilities they shoulder. In a world that’s increasingly unpredictable, security cannot and must not be something that we gamble with – it needs to be unwavering and impregnable.
In conclusion, it becomes imperative to engage in an all-encompassing, detailed investigation into this severe operational failure. Through this, we build a more robust plan of action and bolster our security forces, ensuring that they are better equipped to protect and serve those in the highest offices of our nation.
In the end, the focus is not solely on solving the riddles of the past but more so on ensuring that the lessons learned are taken fully into account. This would help us put up a stronger front against potential future threats, securing not just our leaders, but also reinforcing the overall sense of safety and stability in our great nation.
Ryan Zinke Hints at Sinister Plot Against President Trump appeared first on Real News Now.