I don't know if we'll ever get the truth on this one. The media is so corrupted that you have to assume anything that doesn't fit their narrative, will get playd down if not outright suppressed.
I don't know if we'll ever get the truth on this one. The media is so corrupted that you have to assume anything that doesn't fit their narrative, will get playd down if not outright suppressed.
To an extent I agree, but at the same time, we have such polarized opposites in the media from several sides, the only way something gets truly suppressed is at the highest levels of government, not the media. Anything turned up in the investigation should be released, and since there is no one to prosecute, there is no point in keeping information secret until trial to avoid poisoning a jury. The only exception I can see to this is if there is/was another actor in the plot, whom they are still seeking and don't want to flush out yet.
Do I believe the .gov would hide information? Absolutely... but there also has to be a gain in it for them. Personally, since I know the .gov absolutely loves to keep the "left" and "right" at each others' throats so they can benefit by the misdirection and the distraction, I see it being more useful to them to release any pertinent information (say the killer's political affiliations or left/right leanings), so they can continue playing the two ends against each other.
Just my assessment. I don't see anything of serious import being kept out of sight, unless it is a mandate from the very highest levels, and even then, I believe there are enough who both love and hate one side or the other, there would be a leak that would be impossible to plug.
There is another entity that has a keen interest in keeping any damning details hidden and has the wherewithal to try to keep those details hidden...MGM Resorts and the larger Vegas cabal. MGM alone is a $10b a year industry. Vegas is a quarter billion a year revenue industry.
In today’s litigious society, tort law and protection from liability rule the day. 1% culpability can result in 100% liability in a lawsuit. Not having internal processes and procedures to protect guests can contribute to culpability. Having procedures but not following them can be even worse....for example if MGM policy is to call 911 within X minutes but they waited Y minutes and that delayed the police response etc...
I have no doubt Vegas and MGM are circling the wagons to make sure no damning info comes out about their initial response to the shooting in preparation for the lawsuits that are already being filed. That is far more probable than some government led false flag operation.
In today’s litigious society, tort law and protection from liability rule the day. 1% culpability can result in 100% liability in a lawsuit. Not having internal processes and procedures to protect guests can contribute to culpability. Having procedures but not following them can be even worse....for example if MGM policy is to call 911 within X minutes but they waited Y minutes and that delayed the police response etc...
I have no doubt Vegas and MGM are circling the wagons to make sure no damning info comes out about their initial response to the shooting in preparation for the lawsuits that are already being filed. That is far more probable than some government led false flag operation.
↑↑↑
The gambling casino and resort industry in that county is very powerful and influential in both county and state government.
No telling how much pressure MGM is exerting on the sheriff's investigation.
The gambling casino and resort industry in that county is very powerful and influential in both county and state government.
No telling how much pressure MGM is exerting on the sheriff's investigation.
Yes. Lack of information about Paddock raises suspicions. Minimizing legal lability seems to be the likeliest explanation. The hotel let him use the frieght elevator. How big a gambler was he? Did their desire for profit override their responsibility to ensure safety for guests and the general public? I am not blaming the hotel but a jury might.
I'm not one to gravitate toward conspiracy theories, but there are too many unknowns in this event. Has ISIS ever taken credit for an attack that they did not take part in? Despite law enforcement stressing that the shooter had no radical affiliations, what would be the impact on Vegas if there were a connection between the shooter and ISIS or any other terrorist group? Would the impact would be greater than a lawsuit?
And to add one more element to these questions. A friend of mine was in Vegas many years ago when the casino he was in was robbed by a well armed group. After it was over he was talking to the bartender who told him that it probably wouldn't make the evening news because it's bad for business.
Sadly, this is the way this "investigation" is turning out.
Actually, this may be the only possibility that something eventually comes out because the discovery process has some legal teeth behind it. It would be exceedingly expensive to set up a victims' compensation fund that makes them sign a liability release to receive payment. MGM's pockets are too deep to keep the lawyer sharks away but not deep enough to pay off every possible claimant with a multi-megabuck sum that will keep them away from the courthouse door.
Yes. ISIS, and other groups routinely claim responsibility for attacks they did not carry out.
"Bad for business" is a powerful motivator.
Maybe. That's a good point, but it won't keep those powerful business interests from trying to limit their liability.
A crime was committed on the property of a multi-billion corporation. They aren't just going to say "oops, our bad" and start writing checks to all the claimants that's for sure.
Similar threads
