Follow the link. Davis puts his arguments into article form:
Biden’s Team Deliberately Kneecapped Trump’s Security To Allow An Assassination Attempt
They kept the rooftop open, watched the shooter, kept Trump on the stage, and didn’t do a damn thing until after he had been shot. And we’re supposed to believe it was an innocent oopsie?
Follow the link for the details of Davis’ presentation. He lays a lot of stress on the fact that we know for a fact that the TLAs (three letter agencies) have engaged in manufacturing events of this sort. Here are the last few paragraphs, which partly repeat the sub title:
At some point, you just have to say enough with the lies. We saw what they did with the Russia hoax. We saw the Kavanaugh hoax. We saw the Covid origin hoax. We saw the Ukraine hoax, the stolen election, the J6 op, and then the armed Mar-a-Lago raid and the myriad illegal cases against Trump.
That’s the short list. Elsewhere in the article he brings up the Whitmer FBI kidnapping case. There are additional examples.
They called him Hitler. They said he was an existential threat. They said he would destroy democracy. They said he was the most dangerous person on Earth. Then they denied him security. They kept the rooftop open. They watched the shooter and did nothing. They kept Trump on that stage. And they didn’t do a damn thing until after he had been shot in the head.
And we’re all supposed to believe it was just an innocent oopsie?
Is this fact? Not yet. It’s a theory, but a theory based on facts. As such, in my opinion theories that presume intentional agency are to be preferred to the assumption of hard to believe incompetence. An investigation is not a trial—there should be no presumption of innocence. In any case the federal TLAs have forfeited any such presumption, if there ever was one. There are too many converging factors to simply assume that the multiple security failures were coincidence. Davis’ theory that some person(s) within the command chain intentionally allowed a window of opportunity for Trump to be assassinated. For a professional investigation, it strikes me that Davis’ theory should be the theory that is the working model, the one that has to be disproved before considering the possibility of incompetence.
Interesting counter perspective from the anonymous substack El Gato Malo, which takes the opposite assumption of Hanlon’s razor: “don’t attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity”
https://open.substack.com/pub/boriquagato/p/hanlons-razor-unpacking-plotlines
I've written that I retired from NGA, one of the Big Five of the Intelligence Community and a DOD combat support agency. NGA's "INT" is GEOINT, which means imagery, imagery intelligence and geospatial intelligence. NGA is all about knowing the earth visually.
As a GEOINTer with long experience using imagery, the security flaws were obvious to me immediately when I saw the graphic of the Pennsylvania rally that included the surrounding buildings in proximity to the stage where Trump was speaking. I claim no law enforcement experience, but my GEOINT experience tells me that imagery and geospatial software should've been employed to create buffer zones emanating from the center point of the stage housing Trump. The buffer zones would've been rings of concentric circles that correspond to the distance that bullets from various weapons will travel.
Also, understanding terrain, vantage points, lines of sight, etc. This was a major fail. If reports are true that the police were in the building instead of outside of it, the shooter wouldn't go through screening devices, he allegedly carried a ladder, reports of other shooters, including one on a water tower, and more, it sounds like this attempt was by design. Tucker Carson is prescient.
Off topic. I follow 270towin and they are very slow to update their predictions. The map today moves Georgia to lean Trump and downgrades Illinois, Colorado and New Mexico from dark blue to the middle shade of blue.