Martha MacCallum reminds us in her introduction of Lt Col Tony Shaffer that he is a CIA-trained intel operative, as he details his perspectives on the Las Vegas terrorist attack.
He says, “I think it’s shaping up to be a very deliberate act of terror, this is beyond dispute. The question becomes motive.” He believes most of the clues for the motive are right in front of us, noting the parallels with the person who shot Rep Steve Scalise (R-LA)
Shaffer says the target was “politically selected,” with the perception being that there would be a lot of pro-gun folks there and Trump supporters. He says he believes that Paddock felt it was a legitimate target of political expression.
He says the reason that Hodgkinson and Paddock did what he did was at least partially rooted in the left’s encouragement of the use of violence as an extension and use of political speech. The left has been supporters of Antifa, BAMN and BLM and routinely engaged in violence against Trump supporters during the campaign at the direction of both Obama and Clinton.
He warns against the slippery slope that “violence can become part of someone expressing themselves” and that that is the real danger here. He points out that all of the violence desensitization is on the part of the left, citing Kathy Griffin as an example.
MacCallum raises the fact that ISIS twice claimed responsibility for the attack, pointing out that Paddock doesn’t match up with the typical ISIS recruit. Shaffer agrees, stating that there will be a lot of clues likely gleaned from the ISIS video.
He addresses the ludicrous dismissal of terror as a component within the first hours, saying, “It was completely insane. The FBI has no way of knowing. For goodness sake, the special counsel has been investigating the President’s team for a year looking at Russia collusion. How does the FBI come to the conclusion there’s no terror link, especially now, Martha, in light of the $100,000 transfer to the Philippines.”
He notes that the girlfriend has been upgraded to being a person of interest, “which means that she’s of investigative importance to the whole thing.” MacCallum gives her some credit for coming back voluntarily, if she does so, which Shaffer does as well.
He also raises the obvious implied guilt issues, saying, “We believe that her work with him, being co-located with him, she would know everything intimately Martha about what he was doing. You cannot get past having a house full of guns by someone who is not in the military, who has no previous record of wanting to do things with guns.”
“All of a sudden he buys these.” Shaffer adds, “And we’re talking about, I’ve been told an estimate of $100,000 worth of high-end weapons, so it’s clearly something there.”
Thank you for reading and sharing my work – Please look for me, Rick Wells at https://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/, https://gab.ai/RickRWells, https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RickwellsUs and on my website http://RickWells.US – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US – not dot com, and also follow me on Twitter @RickRWells.