Three Key Questions for Kim Cheatle
As House Republicans prepare to confront the embattled Secret Service director on Monday, Dan Bongino and I offer three crucial questions committee members must ask.
U.S. Secret Service Director Kim Cheatle will testify before the House Oversight Committee on Monday. The embattled director will face withering, and justified, criticism over the agency's handling of Donald Trump's rally in Pennsylvania on July 13, which resulted in the near-assassination of the former president, the murder of one rally-goer, and serious injuries to two more individuals. Millions of Americans remain traumatized by what they saw and thoughts of what could have been.
Breaking news continues to expose multiple security lapses while raising more questions by the hour. The Wall Street Journal reported Friday night that Crooks had used a drone earlier in the day to capture footage of the Butler Farm Show grounds, the site of the rally. Investigators also found “rudimentary explosives” in his vehicle. Crooks was killed by a Secret Service sniper but not before firing off several shots including one that grazed Trump’s ear.
Republicans understandably will be angry and emotional during the hearing with demands for Cheatle's resignation. At this point, it is unclear whether Democrats will join their GOP colleagues in denouncing the agency, but they should since what happened on July 13 represents a systemwide failure that poses an immediate threat to all Secret Service protectees including Joe Biden.
Cheatle’s public interviews and statements have done nothing to inspire confidence in her leadership. Her claims that the agency provided “additional security enhancements… [to] former President Trump's detail in June” appear to contradict whistleblowers’ disclosures made to Senator Josh Hawley, which indicate officials from the DHS’ Homeland Security Investigations unit and not seasoned Secret Service agents represented the majority of Trump’s detail on July 13.
It is hard to think of a more critically important Congressional hearing--and this is no time for grandstanding. The stakes could not be higher. Members are limited to five minutes so House Republicans must maximize their brief amount of time.
In conferring with Dan Bongino, who has announced breaking news on the tragedy on a daily basis, we believe committee members must focus on three crucial questions:
Why was the president allowed to take the stage even after law enforcement flagged the suspicious behavior of Thomas Crooks at least 30 minutes before Trump began to speak? There is a holding area for all protectees; why didn't the Secret Service keep the president in the holding area until the grounds were declared safe and the suspicious individual detained?
Why didn't the Secret Service utilize air cover for the event? There was no substantive aerial surveillance, which should be standard operating procedure. In fact, according to an internal memo sent last week, you are now reactivating a division of the USSS to ensure a three-dimension security bubble including air surveillance. The memo states, "I have requested that INV activate former ASB Special Agents to do two week rotations with ASB during the campaign." Are you saying this has not been the recent practice for all protectees?
Why did agents fail to install a barrier between the vulnerable high site where Crooks took position and the stage? Using a large obstacle such as a truck or large campaign sign once again should be standard operating procedure. The lack of a significant immovable object afforded Crooks an unimpaired line of sight to his target. Explain why your agency did not take such commonsense measures for the event.
As Trump remarkably prepares to hold another public rally in Michigan this evening, Americans will watch the former president with a sense of fear over whether he will be protected from harm. That should not be the case for President Trump or any Secret Service protectee.
Cheatle’s assurances that she has “implemented changes to his security detail” to keep Trump safe provide no measure of comfort to a nervous and outraged populace. There are many questions she should be forced to answer—not just related to last week’s tragedy but several other scandals that happened on her watch—but Republicans should remain focused on the most important points.
To do otherwise will only serve to exacerbate this escalating crisis of confidence.
Answer to question 1: 'we're still investigating that'
Answer to question 2: 'we're still investigating that'
Answer to question 3: 'we're still investigating that'
Why does everyone say"grazed". He was SHOT in the ear! To say otherwise diminishes the violence of the assault. But I think that is on purpose. Don't fall into the left-wing narrative (see Fauci Dismisses Trump Wound on CNN today).