Transcript: “OFF From The BEGINNING!” Charlie Kirk Shooting Conspiracies With Piers Morgan

Welcome to all of you.

Technical Analysis: Could a 22-Year-Old Make That Shot?

Rob, welcome back to our fest. It’s always great to have you. Just from a purely technical point of view, there’s been a lot of speculation that a young, non-military trained, it appears 22-year-old man could be two football fields, 175 yards away from Charlie Kirk and yet kill him apparently so skillfully with one bullet through his neck. Just from a technical point of view, how difficult is that shot to make?

ROB O’NEILL: Good to be with you, Piers. Thanks for having me. That’s an easy shot, even for someone. I mean they throw the word “sniper” around almost as much as they throw the word “hero” around, way too often. Anyone with a hunting rifle, a .30-06 like that, that’s an easy shot. 200 yards. As a sniper, which I am, you pick which nostril you want, I’ll put it in it. So that’s easy.

The issues just for me, I mean it was off right from the beginning for me. Do we not guard rooftops anymore? There’s been assassinations, assassination attempts all over the world. Why aren’t we looking at rooftops?

And then when I was sent the video with this, at the same message where they said Charlie Kirk was just shot, when I watched that horrific video, he was obviously dead before he hit the ground. But the questions immediately started to come to me. That was not an entry wound that we saw. We saw an exit wound. So where’d that bullet come from?

You don’t bleed like… and I’ve shot guys closer than the camera was. And an entry wound doesn’t look like that. An exit wound does. Why did his shirt move the way it did? When I’ve shot people, their shirts didn’t move like that.

And then the initial reaction was, well, he was obviously wearing body armor and it was deflection. One, no, he wasn’t wearing body armor, and two, it doesn’t deflect like that off of body armor. Why was his shirt moving from right to left? Why were people being interviewed saying, “Yeah, they came from my left to right, from his right to left,” immediately shut down.

And then did they tear the crime scene down immediately, just right off the bat from seeing it, knowing he was dead, saying a lot of this is bad. Not even getting into the soliloquy of text messages that 22-year-olds don’t send their trans lovers. So immediately it’s just the official story sounds like it needs to be investigated. But now, you know, the whole crime scene is gone. They paved over it. Nothing to see here.

PIERS MORGAN: It’s really interesting that you think that given your extraordinary experience. Obviously you’ll be the man who shot and killed Osama bin Laden. You were a Navy SEAL for 15 years. You’ve served in some of their most high-profile missions. So you think that there may well be some substance to some of these conspiracy theories?

ROB O’NEILL: I’m just saying, especially in my experience with the bin Laden raid, if you don’t see it happen, people are going to say it didn’t happen. So unfortunately we’re in a state of affairs where if I’m not there, I’m not going to say it did or didn’t happen. I’m just saying what jumps out at me.

With AI right now, with everything that can be made up, if you don’t see it firsthand, you don’t know what happened. Videos can be made immediately. It seemed off to me. Plus, as a sniper or a hunter, you don’t take a neck shot. You take a neck shot because you missed.

The Forensics Perspective: Where’s the Autopsy?

PIERS MORGAN: Let me bring in Joseph Scott Morgan. You’re a forensics scholar. What do you think of what you just heard there from Rob O’Neill?

JOSEPH SCOTT MORGAN: Yeah, I think it’s a fine assessment. One of the problems is at this point in time, from a medical-legal perspective, we don’t have any data to go on. All we have are these speculative things that are floating about the Internet that are, by the way, not doing anybody any good.

Here we have a surgeon who was hands-on there that treated Charlie and he even made reference, I believe, to… he said that Charlie was a Superman, man of steel. In other words, what he’s saying is a round passed through and it didn’t strike anybody else, that the round he’s implying at least did in fact embed itself in his body. Now what the status of that round is, I don’t know.

We don’t have an autopsy report yet either, which is a huge problem if you want to speculate on wound tracks and these sorts of things. And there are people out there that are actually saying that there was not an autopsy performed, even though it is required by Utah state law. The state medical examiner is put into that position where they have to do the autopsy.

So if this is some kind of grand conspiracy, you would have to get a surgeon on board that had no idea this was coming and you would have to get the chief medical examiner for the state of Utah to agree to this, which seems very fanciful at the very least.

PIERS MORGAN: The autopsy thing is totally baffling. Why would there not have been one?

JOSEPH SCOTT MORGAN: First off, let’s stop using the word “assassination.” That’s one of the problems we ran into with Kennedy. From a death investigator’s perspective, a forensics guy’s perspective, this is a murder investigation. This is a homicide. You politicize it when you say assassination.

Let the Utah State Police and let the medical examiner do their job in this particular case. Let them work this case as it is, as a homicide, and draw upon the physical evidence. And the reason we don’t have these documents right now is this kid’s going to be prosecuted. They’re going to take him into court and they’re going to prosecute him and they’re going to seek the death penalty.

So don’t be shocked if we don’t see an autopsy report for some time. And don’t be shocked that the Utah state medical examiner keeps their mouth shut in here because there have been other cases where people have run their mouths in advance and it winds up getting in far more trouble.

PIERS MORGAN: But does your gut tell you, Joseph, that this is most likely to have been the shooter we saw on the roof? Who is this 22-year-old who’s obviously facing the charges on the death penalty?

JOSEPH SCOTT MORGAN: You know, at this point, I have no other reason to believe that it was someone else. You know, some phantom that may have snuck up behind them that had popped off some kind of round from some other type of weapon platform that would have been in his rear. It just seems… it seems to me… and look, I agree with Rob relative to the round, this is a very easy shot.

I’m older than most of you guys. I had to qualify with iron sights at 300 yards in the army. I’m not a very good shot. But way back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, that’s even an easy shot with a steel sight. So, yeah, I’m not, you know, with a telescopic sight from that range, yeah, I think it’d be a walk in the park.

The CIA Perspective: Social Media’s Role in Conspiracy Theories

PIERS MORGAN: Let me bring in Mike Baker. I mean, Mike, whenever there’s a high-profile shooting like this, there’s always raging conspiracy theories. And that’s been massively exacerbated by social media and by a lot of people probably in the world of debating these things sometimes acting in deliberate bad faith.

They’re just running with the conspiracy theories because it’s getting loads of views and making money and so on. And I’m not going to be a hypocrite. We’re running a debate here about the conspiracy theories to try and get to some reality. But I certainly don’t want to promote stuff if it’s outlandish. With all your experience as a former CIA agent, what is your overview of the Charlie Kirk killing?

MIKE BAKER: Yeah, things… most of the time, things are pretty much as simple as they seem. And then the other truism is social media and the Internet… I don’t want to sound like a Luddite, but pretty much destroys everything it touches.

So the social media conspiracy theory started literally within a couple of minutes of people becoming aware that Charlie had been shot. You know, everything from “this is a professional hit.” And the unwarranted confidence of people on the Internet and in social media to push forward their ideas is astounding.

One minute they’re Russian criminologists, one minute they’re a pandemic expert, you know, the next minute they’re an expert on assassinations. And if you combine that nature of human tendency along with AI and deep fakes, it’s no wonder that you disappear into social media and it’s a cesspool. It is a sewer system. And that’s where this young individual disappeared into.

So the idea, you know, I’m not… again, you always have to be careful. Every investigation has to be built on facts, right? On evidence, on information. And our tendency, because we want an immediate answer, because we’ve all been trained for that and everybody’s got ADHD, is they don’t have the patience.

And as was just pointed out, I agree with everything that was just said. You got to give these investigations time to sort themselves out. But that’s not what people want. They want an immediate answer. And if you don’t fill that void, they’re just going to make crap up.

Examining the Evidence: What Rings Alarm Bells?

PIERS MORGAN: Everything that you’ve read, though, from more authoritative sources, is there anything ringing alarm bells? I mean, people have been talking about why did he leave the weapon wrapped in a towel. You know, a lot of coverage of it running across the rooftop. Would he be able to disassemble the rifle as fast as he apparently did, throwing it down his pants and jumping off the roof and so on? Is there anything about any of this which to you rings alarm bells or not?

MIKE BAKER: No, no. I mean, again, that’s, you know, it’s a simplistic answer. And yes, the investigation’s still ongoing. Never say never, right? You never, you know, there’s always going to be something that could surprise you.

But look, this guy obviously looked at Butler as an example. Rob said it himself, at what point do we look around? You could have scouted that perimeter and without really any formal training and said, “I think I see a few problems here.”

And that’s… I would look at this from more of an operational perspective as how do you prevent the next one? How could you have prevented this? Well, look, it’s hindsight and that’s a terrible thing to go on, but at the same time, they should have locked this down a long time ago.

Charlie was getting death threats, he talked about them. He shouldn’t have been doing events out in the open. You put them inside where you could, you know, lock down the perimeter, you could screen people, you put up metal detectors, you just provide a more secure environment.

But again, you know, I don’t want to armchair quarterback this thing, but that’s where I typically go. I don’t disappear down…

The Security Failures and Unanswered Questions

PIERS MORGAN: Well, I, you know, I think, right, I mean, let me bring Rob back in because you raised a really interesting question, Rob, which is, you know, Donald Trump was nearly assassinated by a young guy around the same age as this shooter on a roof about the same distance from somebody speaking in public.

Charlie Kirk was an extremely high profile conservative representative of the conservative movement, going into big open air areas with roofs everywhere. It does seem quite staggering to me, and it was staggering to me when the Trump one happened, that someone like that could get that close on a flat roof with a clean shot of the President of the United States.

And then even more extraordinary, eight weeks later, somebody hid in a bush at a golf course and nearly killed him there. You know, I just, again, I’m not a big conspiracy theory person as a rule of thumb, because most of them turn out to be nonsense. But you haven’t got to be conspiracy theorists to think what is going on here.

ROB O’NEILL: Yeah, I agree with you. I wasn’t with the security team and I don’t want to pass judgment on their decisions that were made. But it’s like it almost seemed like in the aftermath too, everyone’s shifting the blame. Where we had personal security, where there should have been local cops, well, the campus security had this. It’s like, look, man, give me five dudes, tier one guys, we’ll lock it down.

Then the first place we’re checking is the rooftops. Then we’re checking the bushes. You’re looking for little stuff like perfect circles and square. Perfect circles, perfect squares, perfect lines don’t exist in nature. So you’re looking for scopes, you’re looking for lines of a barrel, stuff like that. It should be locked down.

And then I mean, just even, you know, even going back, speaking of conspiracies going back to 9/11 with the plane hitting the Pentagon, we have one camera on the most secure area in the world. Why is it now in 2025 we got grainy footages of a dude who might not be the dude? Where’s, I mean, you got people with this technology all over the place. Everyone’s got a camera in their hand. Why is it we get one grain of footage of a dude that looks like someone’s son?

It just doesn’t make sense to me. I mean, you go back to, you know, was Jack Ruby just a great American because he killed Lee Harvey Oswald while he was saying he’s a patsy or was he a patsy who’s involved and why? And it’s again, you know, and just because of, I’m talking here next to my phone, the algorithm’s listening to me. It’s going to start shifting all this conspiracy stuff so I can look at it when I’m scrolling through my phone.

So it’s very important to realize what’s real and isn’t real. But it seems to me like yeah, nobody, nobody’s really been fired or gotten a lot of trouble for stuff that’s happening that. I mean look at the Secret Service detail, look at the cops that were in that town. What have the counter snipers done? Is there any accountability other than the people who get shot? I mean, at some point there’s got to be truth telling and accountability. I’m seeing none of that except, you know, conspiracy theories and everyone, myself included, is an online lawyer that has all the answers.

The Gun Control Debate

PIERS MORGAN: Yeah, I mean, let me bring Joseph back in here. When we look at stories like this, one of the other aspects is that a lot of people come out particularly on the left. And my views about this issue are well known. I’m not going to legislate those again, mainly because I’m not American.

But I think on this one many people say, well, obviously if there was more gun restrictions, gun control, these young unhinged people wouldn’t get their hands on weaponry. But it seemed here that he just took his grandfather’s old rifle. I’m not sure there’s any new gun control law you could bring in that could stop that happening. I mean, what do you think of that part of this debate?

JOSEPH SCOTT MORGAN: No, no, there’s not. What are you going to do? You go to every house and get Papaw’s old hunting gun? Because that’s what this comes down to. We’re talking about a Mauser 98 bolt action .30-06 rifle. Look, I live in the south. I can tell you the lion’s share of people have at least a bolt action in their house and a shotgun. And you know, what are you going to do? Go door to door and seize all of the weapons? That ain’t happening, I can tell you that.

So the idea that this can be some way interdicted I think is quite, it’s an interesting consideration. But on the other hand, we’ve got an entire generation that’s out there that has little or no help for mental health issues. And I think a lot of this goes back to that. You know, you begin to think about the road this guy was on. And I don’t, you know, I don’t personally know him, but I do know that he’s disturbed enough, at least at this point, it appears that he’s willing to take out Charlie Kirk in front of hundreds of other people.

And by the way, just if you just track that round from where he fired from, if he was off just a couple of inches, that round would have been powerful enough to have passed through maybe a couple of people en route. He had a very small window that he was aiming through. If you look at the top of that tarp and then the top of the heads below, that guy had to get that shot off through there. If he had miscalculated in any way, it could have killed other people.

So you’ve got somebody that certainly is not risk averse here. And the big question is, why would that be? Why would this be normalized behavior? Because I got to tell you, it kind of seems like it is sometimes.

The George Zinn Conspiracy Theory

PIERS MORGAN: Yeah, I don’t disagree, Mike. One of the big sort of conspiracy theories raging, Joe Rogan was particularly skeptical about this one was the role of a guy called George Zinn, somebody who acted irrationally, erratically, the scene was initially arrested. Let’s listen to what Joe said.

VIDEO CLIP BEGINS:

Joe Rogan: This guy was at 9/11. He was at the Boston bombings. He called in a fake bomb at another place, and then he did this, at this thing right after. So somehow or another, this guy has the state of mind that the moment someone gets shot, he yells out and says, “I did it.”

“I did it.” And takes his pants down or something like that. I don’t know exactly what he did then. Ready for this? He gets arrested for child porn right away, right after this happened. Right away, he’s in jail for child porn. Why is that? Well, now you can’t interview him.

VIDEO CLIP ENDS:

PIERS MORGAN: So we looked into this on the bomb threat history. The Associated Press did report on April 23, 2013, that this guy George Zinn made a bomb threat at the Utah Marathon shortly after the Boston Marathon. But there’s no actual evidence he was also at the Boston marathon on the 9/11 suggestion. There’s no credible evidence supporting claims that Zinn was present at that either.

A lot of these associations seem to have been promoted from pretty crazy accounts on X not verified reporting the child pornography arrest did happen. So again, Mike, there’s a lot of stuff flying around here and no one’s really sure what to believe. It was a weird moment because I was watching it all at the time. And this guy, George Zinn is quite well known to people. He’s quite notorious. The fact he was there at all just looked very odd. But he seems to have been just a complete red herring. He’s like, he’s nothing to do with this.

MIKE BAKER: Yeah, yeah, look, that goes back to what we talked about before, right? You’ve got to build, whether you’re an individual who’s trying to assess the credibility of something you’re reading online or whether you’re involved in an investigation, you got to build these things on firm ground, right?

And again, if you hear something, it gets repeated. Someone clicks on it, they send it to their friends. Next thing you know, you got people saying, yeah, this guy is the Zelig of disasters. He’s been showing up at every crisis and disaster, you know, for 20 years. And none of it’s built on actual information, actual, credible, proven information.

The only way, look, I go on about this all the time, but the only line of defense to stop some of the nonsense that’s out there is the individual. The individual person has to learn how to be somewhat cynical and curious and to take the time, which is difficult because everybody’s busy. Take the time to look into the credibility of the crap they’re reading before they just send it along or repeat it to somebody else. You’ve got to do this.

I will go back to a couple things that we just said, if I may. This is a mental health crisis. It’s not a gun control crisis. So I agree 100%. Our failure in this country is dealing with mental health issues. And that’s basically at the bottom of all of these recent incidents that we’ve been seeing.

The other thing is this kid wasn’t taking a neck shot. You read these things and go, oh, my God, that’s a professional shot. This kid got lucky. And nobody wants to think that something this terrible or tragic can happen because his shot, you know, he was probably going center mass or he was going somewhere. He was not saying to himself, “I’m going to shoot Charlie Kirk in the neck.”

And so if you think about the terrible fortune of that happening, nobody wants to think that it’s bad luck to create something that causes this much sadness or emotion. It’s similar to Kennedy or some of these others where, you know, it lives on because people don’t want to think that a world shattering event could happen because some psycho picks up a gun and gets off a shot.

The Suspicious Text Messages

PIERS MORGAN: You know, Rob, you touched on this earlier, but I think one of the more curious aspects of this, which I think needs a lot more answers are the text messages between the shooter and his trans boyfriend, girlfriend, whatever you want to call his trans partner. Because they just read like almost, if you were putting stuff into AI of you know how to do a text message exchange, it would come out like this. Right. It didn’t read to me very natural. What did you make of it?

ROB O’NEILL: Yeah, I mean I’ve got three adult kids that text me. Not every time I’d like them to, but they do. And it never sounds like that. I can’t remember the last time my 22 year old used a comma. My 18 year old certainly never has. Yeah, it just doesn’t work that way.

It’s either AI or when I started reading it, other than, you know, no one’s saying rifle, no one’s saying “my love” over and over. My first thought was this is someone who doesn’t speak English as their first language. They’re translating it. But it’s almost like when you, you know, it’s like sending a dude from Southie from South Boston to Georgia and having them fit in. You just sound a little bit different. I could tell you from somewhere else.

The text don’t make any sense whatsoever. And the way that they’re just put out there, this long dramatic script, it just again, that’s in a handful of stuff that just doesn’t make sense to me anyway. I wasn’t there. I need to keep reiterating that. I didn’t like that. I don’t like the number of tools that you need to take apart .30-06 or how much time you need, how many different tools and then, well, that’s pretty interesting.

PIERS MORGAN: So let me stop you there. So if you were doing that with all your training, you were one of the most elite guys in Special Forces in American history. If you were dismantling this precise rifle, how long would it take you to do it? A .30-06.

Security Concerns and Investigative Questions

ROB O’NEILL:

Well, it’s going to take several minutes. I can’t even remember. I grew up. My first rifle was a 3006 in Montana and I can’t remember the last time I took it apart. I could take the bolt out, clean that off. But in order to break it down to the point where you can even walk with a limp, it’s going to take a solid five minutes. I would guess with different. I don’t even think he’d use that type of a screwdriver that he had with his DNA conveniently all over it because you know, everything you touch has your DNA on it.

It’s just taking it apart, putting it together, taking a shot, cold bore, by the way, where your scope wasn’t on there. Taking it back apart, putting it in your pants, climbing down a fence, getting back into the woods, putting it together as you’re on the run, wrapping it in a towel, then, you know, driving 200 miles away to type to my love the 300 lines of text.

PIERS MORGAN:

It’s just.

ROB O’NEILL:

None of it makes sense to me. Again, I’m not conspiring with anybody and I’m not saying it was something that it’s not. And like Mike was saying, usually the most obvious thing that happened is what happened. I wish it never happened, but so many things just don’t add up to me.

The Right to Question

PIERS MORGAN:

Yeah, I think it’s perfectly reasonable, Joseph, for people to ask questions. Right. I mean, you don’t have to buy into any single conspiracy theory or say that it actually won’t end up being exactly, like Mike said, exactly how we think it is. Right. And it might well be. It might well be the case.

But Charlie Kirk wasn’t just any shooting victim. You know, he was the leader of the young conservative Christian right movement in the United States that carried with it a lot of fame, a lot of infamy, a lot of acclaim, a lot of people that loved him, people that hated him. You know, there’s a clear political element to all this which hasn’t fully unraveled yet in terms of exactly how radicalized this shooter was. Did anybody else help him? We don’t really know yet.

ROB O’NEILL:

Right.

PIERS MORGAN:

There are lots of unanswered questions. I have no problem in this kind of process, particularly with all the disinformation flying around, the obvious stuff that’s nonsense in actually just doing what Rob just did. Go, you know what? This might all be completely how it went down, but for someone like Rob O’Neill to say it would take him five minutes to do what I think the police had said was done in like a minute or so, that immediately says to me, well, that’s a bit odd. It is a bit odd. Right.

How did this young kid who hasn’t been in the military, wasn’t a Navy seal, didn’t kill Osama bin Laden. How has he managed to do all this with such apparent ease and file one shot that carries out the purpose that he had, which was to murder Charlie Kirk from nearly 200 yards away, you know. Yeah. He may have just got incredibly lucky and he might be incredibly quick at dismantling and putting together his granddad’s rifle, but it is all a bit odd. Yeah. It is.

Digital Evidence and Surveillance

JOSEPH SCOTT MORGAN:

I think that one of the interesting aspects of this from an investigative perspective is going back in time and trying to understand if there is anything in his data that’s going to indicate when he took notice. I don’t know if this is possible. When he took notice that Charlie would be present on campus, did he go there to that particular area and surveil that area? That’s a very specific location. How did he get access to that roof without being seen? And also carrying a long arm up there. Did he disassemble it prior to taking it up there? Did he reassemble it?

If you look at that one image that’s on the roof, you can see there’s, like, evidence markers up there. And it appears to be. At least, you know, the roof is flat, it’s covered with gravel.

PIERS MORGAN:

You can see what it looks like.

JOSEPH SCOTT MORGAN:

The outline of an individual that is lying in a prone position. I don’t know, maybe that’s just convenience. Maybe that’s my lying eyes. I have no idea. But when I see that, that’s what I’m thinking. And there’s going to be a lot of little points of evidentiary value along the way.

Here’s something else that we really haven’t considered, unlike, you know, if you think about the Zapruder film all those years ago, you had one POV there. I can tell you this. I know that there was. There were a lot of people out there filming this. We have yet to see all of that data from multiple perspectives all the way around. 360 degrees from that specific point at that moment. You know, no one was expecting this. And as the old adage goes, you know, the camera never blinks.

When all of that is compiled as well, that’s going to be another piece to this that we don’t really have a view of at this point in time, you know, and there’s any number of cases out there. We’re just coming off the Coburger trial right now that we paid attention to for a long time. You know, we had physical evidence relative to a weapon and blood and all that stuff. But one of the things that really hung this guy was all of the digital data that you can trace back to him and kind of his movements and all this stuff.

I think that a lot of this information is going to be sourced from spectators. You’ve got everybody out, and that’s the nature of things. You know, everybody’s got their phone out, they’re videotaping or taping, recording. So I think that some of that data is going to come into play here as well.

Patterns of Secrecy

PIERS MORGAN:

Yeah. And Mike, you know, it’s interesting, isn’t it, if you think back to the shooter who tried to kill Donald Trump at that open air event, you know, we know so little about that person. So little. I mean, that could have been one of the most notorious moments in American history. And yet we still know so little. There seemed to be no like digital trail, which for a kid of that age seems so early twenties. Really. There’s nothing there that we’ve been reported. I mean, again, you know, it’s just a bit odd, right?

JOSEPH SCOTT MORGAN:

Why do we not know more about that guy?

MIKE BAKER:

Yeah, I mean, that’s the thing, right? You can stack all this up and what Rob said, all those questions. Yeah. And you have to ask all these questions.

PIERS MORGAN:

Right.

MIKE BAKER:

And that’s what investigators do that are involved in any case, because again, you don’t take anything off the table until the evidence shows otherwise. But you’re right, the look at the Las Vegas shooter at the music festival, right. What do we know about that cat? I mean, so it’s not uncommon that oftentimes you think, well, this is the most earth shattering thing I’ve seen today. And then two days later we’re all raccoons chasing the next shiny object. And so we forget.

So again, law enforcement, particularly at the federal level, hasn’t seemed to understand this, this point that they need to be in this day and age with the way that information flows and how people develop ideas and theories and all these, they need to be as transparent as possible. Right. There’s some of these things you can’t, you can’t put out there. Like, like as we just said, the cell phone data. Right. We’re going to know this kid was sitting up on that roof. That thing would have been pinging, Right. So they’ll have all that information and they’re using that for the case. Right. So that’s, they’re not releasing that.

You know, they’ve got other video footage they’re not releasing because they’re building this case and they want to make sure that it’s airtight. But to the degree they can, you know, and again, they haven’t learned this lesson over quite some time is they need to be more transparent because the way that information moves from person to person and people develop ideas and they get distrustful of government for these very reasons. And there’s an obligation on the part of federal law enforcement in particular to be more transparent. As transparent as possible.

Trump’s Security Concerns

PIERS MORGAN:

Rob, finally, do you worry about Donald Trump’s safety because I do. Because there was a very close assassination attempt where his ear got grazed and people were killed behind him. Then the golf course fiasco, which was so close to him being killed. And that guy was in that bush for 12 hours. One secret Service agent happened to spot the barrel sticking out of a bush. Otherwise Trump was up there in five minutes and would have been killed.

But I still see him appearing in a lot of like, quite big public things where the security around him immediately in that vicinity seems a little bit perfunctory given the climate we now operate in and given what’s happened before. Do you worry about his security?

ROB O’NEILL:

I’m not worried about his security. I know the Secret Service is confident as long as we keep people on the detail that are there for performance alone. And by that I mean people who are taller than the principal, this being the president, United States and people who’ve done it before. You don’t need to pick up a bunch of people from a desk just so eventually they can get promoted. It needs to be confidence, competence alone.

He’s going to have threats out there. They know exactly. They being the Secret Service, know exactly where he’s going weeks in advance. They have a different advent, advanced trips. They’re going there, talking to the locals, getting all the stuff, security. I don’t worry about him right now, but they need to be smart about it.

The realization that so far, to include Charlie Kirk, they’ve run into amateurs who are on rooftops when they run into a real sniper who’s not trying to camouflage what’s in front of him but what’s way behind him to get to make it almost look like it’s two dimensional. To someone looking for him in binoculars or spotting scope, it could get deadly. But you need to keep your perimeter tight. You know, start in workout and then keep the perimeter to a certain extent. You don’t need to give him unlimited fields of access in places that have access. You need to have people there. It’s that simple. This is really, this is really day one stuff that we’re making a lot harder than it needs to be.

PIERS MORGAN:

Well, that’s why I found the golf course one almost more shocking than the first one, actually, because, you know, this is where he played golf many Sundays. It was his local golf course in Florida. And the vantage point that the shooter chose was where the media used to go if they wanted to get a good clean shot, ironically, of Trump playing golf with a camera. Right.

So it was almost like, you know, doing stuff by numbers. If you’re trying to work out where somebody might try and kill him on his golf course, you would choose that very area of bushes. And yet he. That guy was allowed to be there for 12 hours. I still find that, like, really shocking.

ROB O’NEILL:

Well, even though. Even when they’re tracking him and it’s almost like there was a movie, I think Clear and Present Danger, where they’re showing sniper training and they grabbed, like, a Quarter pounder with cheese wrapper. He had lunch here. They were doing that with this dude in Florida. He must have eaten here. And he’s like, come on, guys. What.

PIERS MORGAN:

What.

ROB O’NEILL:

On what planet are you doing? Security.

PIERS MORGAN:

It’s like.

ROB O’NEILL:

And the most obvious spot. Put a dude there. Put. Put it. Put a guy or a girl there, whoever’s working for this, and watch it, like, go to the principal spot. Where would I be? And if I was taking a shot at this person, where would I go? It’s not. I mean, we’re really talking easy stuff here. For some reason. We like to make everything a lot more difficult.

PIERS MORGAN:

Yeah, I agree. Gentlemen, fascinating conversation. I really appreciate your time. Thank you very much.

MIKE BAKER:

Thank you.

Oxford Natural Supplement Promotion

Thank you. Today’s show is brought to you by Oxford Natural, makers of the Optimum Day and Optimum Night, all natural supplements. Thousands of Brits and Americans are already taking them with incredible results.

Optimum Day is designed to boost your energy and support weight loss throughout the day. Optimum Night helps you relax and get deep, refreshing sleep.

And don’t just take their word for it. Here are just a few of their success stories. England football legend Michael Owen lost 40 pounds. Robbie, the face of AFTV, dropped over 100 pounds. Linda, a top law firm executive, lost 50 pounds. And Anita, an immigration lawyer, shed 60 pounds.

To watch their full stories and find out more, scan the QR code on your screen or visit oxfordnatural.com/piers and here’s the best part. Use the code PIERS and get 70% off your first order. Get 70% off with the promo code PIERS.

Support Independent Media

Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. To enjoy our show, we offer only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple podcasts.

And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate, and entertain and will do it all for free. Independent, uncensored media has never been more critical and we couldn’t do it without you.

Related Posts

• Transcript: The Spiritual Crisis of Modern Intelligence: Sam Harris
• Transcript: Producer Dan Farah on Joe Rogan Podcast #2416
• Transcript: 9/11 Widow Kristen Breitweiser on Tucker Carlson Show
• Transcript: Ryan Montgomery on Roblox, Minecraft, Discord & the Darkest Online Cult – Shawn Ryan Show (SRS #255)
• Transcript: Ryan Montgomery – #1 Ethical Hacker on Shawn Ryan Show (SRS #56)