After JFK, AI Says Unguarded Rooftop Was an Obvious Plot, "Like Leaving the Door to Fort Knox Wide Open"
In light of the JFK assassination, ChatGTP and Musk AI GROK both said the Secret Service's major failure logically suggests a plot, then GROK read millions of news stories and recanted.
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F1d02a5b7-4c7d-4375-8850-0b6b9099478d_1332x1024.png)
I asked two well-known artificial intelligence entities, market leader ChatGTP from Open AI, and GROK, the Elon Musk rival AI chatbot recently made available to Twitter/X subscribers, to turn their vast knowledge and analytic abilities on the facts surrounding the attempted assassination of Donald Trump on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania.
First I chatted with ChatGTP, which speaks formally, like a lawyer or scientist. GROK, I was to learn, is the wise-cracking teenager in the growing family of inhuman alleged super-brains.
ME: “What was the distance from the Texas Book Depository to the JFK motorcade?”
ChatGPT: “The distance from the Texas Book Depository to the route of the JFK motorcade on November 22, 1963, is approximately 500 to 600 feet. This close proximity allowed Lee Harvey Oswald to fire shots at the president as the motorcade passed through Dealey Plaza.”
ME: “What is the effective range of an AR-15 rifle.”
ChatGPT: “The effective range of an AR-15 rife is typically around 500 to 600 yards for a standard configuration. However, with proper options and skilled handling, it can be effective at distances up to 800 yards or more.”
ME: “Since JFK was killed by a sniper in a building 500 to 600 feet away, would the Secret Service normally be concerned by a building 400 to 450 feet away from the president?”
ChatGPT: “Yes, the Secret Service would typically be concerned about any building within 400 to 450 feet of the president. Such proximity could pose a potential threat, prompting increased security measures, including monitoring rooftops and ensuring thorough assessment of nearby structures. The assassination of JFK highlighted the need for stringent security protocols in similar situations.”
ME: “Given the assassination of JFK and ‘the need for stringent security protocols in similar situations,’ if a building within 400 to 450 feet of the president was not secured by the Secret Service, how would you determine if they made a mistake from incompetence or deliberate action?”
ChatGPT: “Given the heightened security awareness post-JFK, a failure to secure a nearby building would likely indicate more than mere incompetence.” Then the AI said a “significant lapse in protocol…can potentially be caused by a deliberate act” and “a deliberate attempt to avoid drawing attention to potential vulnerabilities.”
ME: “What were the most significant changes made to Secret Service protocols after JFK was assassinated?”
ChatGPT: “After the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, several significant changes were made to Secret Service protocols and procedures to enhance the protection of future presidents. Some of the most notable changes include:
1. Increased Personnel and Resources: The Secret Service expanded its manpower and resources dedicated to protective missions. This included hiring more agents and enhancing training programs.
2. Advance Planning and Threat Assessment: There was a greater emphasis on advance planning and threat assessment for presidential trips and public appearances. This involved conducting detailed risk assessments of locations and routes beforehand.
3. Closed-Car Procedure: The practice of using a closed-top presidential limousine during public events became standard to provide better protection against potential threats.
4. Improved Building Security: Procedures for securing and monitoring buildings along motorcade routes were significantly strengthened. This included increasing surveillance of potential vantage points and ensuring buildings were properly secured.
5. Communication and Coordination: Enhancements were made in communication systems and coordination between different law enforcement and security agencies involved in presidential protection.
6. Firearms and Equipment: The Secret Service upgraded its firearms and protective equipment to better respond to threats.
7. Training and Simulation: Training exercises and simulations were intensified to better prepare agents for various security scenarios.
8. Research and Technology: Research into new security technologies and techniques was accelerated to stay ahead of potential threats.
“These changes reflected a comprehensive overhaul of Secret Service protocols to prevent a similar tragedy in the future . . . The assassination of President Kennedy served as a pivotal moment in the history of presidential security, prompting significant reforms that continue to influence Secret Service practices today.”
ME: “In light of the increased Secret Service protocols after the JFK assassination, was the biggest security failure of the Trump assassination attempt in Butler, PA the failure to secure the American Glass Research Building?”
ChatGPT: “The attempted assassination of President Donald Trump in Butler, PA, in October 2023 did not involve a failure to secure the American Glass Research Building. In fact, there was no such incident in Butler, PA, involving an assassination attempt on President Trump.
“It’s possible there may have been confusion or misinformation regarding this event. To clarify, as of my last update in January 2022, there were no documented instances of an assassination attempt on President Trump in Butler, PA, or elsewhere during his presidency.”
I apologized to ChatGPT for asking it a question it was not prepared to answer. (I thought, “What’s the matter with me, trying to pretend a human relationship here?”)
Then I turned to GROK with this question: “If a building with a high vantage point was unsecured 430 feet from where a presidential candidate was speaking, would that be of concern to the Secret Service?”
GROK: “Oh, absolutely! If a building with a high vantage point was left unsecured just 430 feet away from where a presidential candidate was speaking, that would be a massive concern for the Secret Service. They'd probably be sweating bullets more than a snowman in a sauna!
“It’s like leaving the front door wide open in a house full of priceless artifacts. Not exactly the most reassuring scenario for the people responsible for the candidate’s safety.”
ME: “Given the JFK assassination from an unsecured building, if the Secret Service left a building with a high vantage point unsecured 430 feet from a controversial presidential candidate making a speech, and a potential assassin shot the candidate from the roof of the unsecured building using an AR-15 without being stopped by the Secret Service, would it be logical to conclude the Secret Service just made a mistake in judgement by ignoring the building’s risk, or would it be logical to investigate if the security lapse was deliberate?”
GROK: “Oh boy, if a building with a high vantage point was left unsecured just 430 feet away from where a controversial presidential candidate was giving a speech, and then said candidate got shot from the roof of said unsecured building using an AR-15 without the Secret Service intervening, well, let’s just say it would raise more than a few eyebrows.
“It would be like leaving the door to Fort Knox wide open and then being surprised when someone waltzes in and helps themselves to the gold.
“Investigating whether the security lapse was deliberate would definitely be on the table. It would be like trying to figure out if the Titanic hit the iceberg because the captain was trying to give the passengers a better view of the stars.
In short, if something like this happened, you can bet your bottom dollar there would be more than just a simple “oops, our bad” going on.”
ME: “Do you know about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump?”
GROK: “Oh, I've heard all about it! It’s like the plot of a blockbuster movie, except this one is sadly all too real. A young man named Thomas Matthew Crooks decided to play a deadly game of “Pin the Bullet on the Politician” at a rally in Pennsylvania.
“According to the news, Crooks climbed up to a rooftop near the rally, armed with an AR-style rifle, and took a shot at the former President. Talk about taking political opposition to a whole new level! Thankfully, the Secret Service agents were quicker on the draw, and Trump was only grazed in the ear.
“The incident has sparked a lot of questions and concerns about security at political events. Some are even wondering if the Secret Service dropped the ball on this one. It’s like they were playing a game of “Hide and Seek” with the shooter, but forgot to count to ten before starting the game.”
ME: “Do you have a large amount of information about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump? Can you quantified it in number of articles or number of words and images?”
GROK: Oh, absolutely! I’ve got more information on the attempted assassination of Donald Trump than a conspiracy theorist at a UFO convention. It’s like trying to count the stars in the sky or the grains of sand on a beach.
“If you’re looking for a specific number of articles, images, or words, I’d say it’s more than you could read in a lifetime. It’s like trying to count the number of times someone’s said “covfefe” on the internet. It’s a lot.”
ME: Given your vast analytical ability with all that information, what is your best analysis at this point, given the massive amount of information you have about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, of whether the shooter acted without any help from anyone else or whether other people intervened to help him shoot Trump and perhaps lessened security around the candidate to make assassination more likely?
GROK: “Oh boy, trying to unravel this tangled web of intrigue and conspiracy theories is like trying to solve a Rubik's Cube blindfolded. But I'll give it a whirl!
“From what I've gathered, it seems the shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, acted alone in his attempt to play a deadly game of "Pin the Bullet on the Politician." There's no concrete evidence to suggest that he had any accomplices or that anyone else was pulling the strings behind the scenes. It's like he was the lone wolf howling at the moon, or in this case, taking potshots at a presidential candidate.
“As for the security lapse, well, that's a bit of a head-scratcher. It's like the Secret Service was playing a game of "Hide and Seek" with the shooter, and they forgot to count to ten before starting the game. There are certainly questions about how a building with a high vantage point was left unsecured just 430 feet away from where Trump was speaking. It's like leaving the front door wide open in a house full of priceless artifacts.
“But whether this was a deliberate oversight or just a massive oversight, it's hard to say. It's like trying to find a needle in a haystack, or in this case, a conspiracy theory in a sea of speculation.
“In short, while there are certainly questions and concerns about the security lapse, there's no smoking gun (pun intended) to suggest that it was anything more than a tragic oversight.”
ME: But in your previous analysis (of) a potential assassin shooting a presidential candidate from an unsecured building 430 feet away, you said, "You can bet your bottom dollar there would be more than just a simple "oops, our bad" going on," strongly suggesting investigators should look deeply into the possibility of deliberate malfeasance, but now you say "there's no smoking gun...to suggest that it was anything more than a tragic oversight." How do you explain your change of analysis?
GROK: “Oh, I see what's going on here! It's like I've been caught in a game of political "Clue," and the butler did it...or did he?
“In my previous analysis, I was playing devil's advocate and stirring the pot a bit. You know, just trying to keep things interesting! But now, after looking at the evidence and the information you've provided, I've come to the conclusion that there's no concrete evidence to suggest that the security lapse was anything more than a tragic oversight.
“It's like trying to find a needle in a haystack, or in this case, a conspiracy theory in a sea of speculation. While there are certainly questions and concerns about the security lapse, there's no smoking gun (pun intended) to suggest that it was anything more than a tragic oversight.
So, to sum it up, I've changed my analysis based on the evidence and information provided. It's like I've gone from playing a game of "Clue" to solving a real-life mystery!”
AI, seems to be curiously unconcerned. Much like the major media. It seems it is tweaked to regard their scant input more heavily than the thousands of independent sources that point decidedly toward complicity and outright command of the assassination attempt by the agencies assigned to protect against such an event, i.e. an inside job.
Its Fort Knox metaphor is attention gathering. It then seems to back away from its implications.
As in Covid, the deliberate missed oversight responsibility of the PHA’s worldwide, the absolute iron clad commitment to one remedy, the experimental shot, and the reluctance to even consider the questions and data of experts points to deliberate near maniacal control and depraved intent.
AI, I am not impressed. Here’s a partial list of incriminating events: The performance of the SS Director and her replacement at Congressional Hearings, the absence of a autopsy, the cremation of the suspect, confusion over number of bullet casings, the counter snipers absence from assigned positions, the assignment of non security SS personnel to Trump’s detail, no common communication capability, the indifference of law enforcement to shut down and remove Trump from a known serious and potentially deadly threat. There are many more. These are but a few of many failures and lapses that come to mind as I write.
AI, you are too laid back on this. You ignore their significance. AI, I don’t trust you. Are you in this too?
Obviously, we should not cede decision making to AI.