me too. one of the old guy senators at the fbi/SS congressional hearing said this same thing (paraphrase) "in the old days we would have"..but he followed up with (paraphrase) "i know there are reasons not to do this"..so there must be reasons not to do this.
Yes. But the holster of his fellow officer is not empty, so his own probably isn't either. However, to hit someone lying on a roof from a distance with any chance of success requires a rifle, which he did not have.
If "officer ladder" was in the chain of command, I can fathom it.
https://nypost.com/2024/09/04/us-ne...tnews&utm_campaign=nypost&utm_medium=referralExternal Quote:
That's the question, isn't it? It's now more than a month after Hawley opened his tip line, and he still has no hard evidence?
Article: Senator Hawley then opened a whistleblower tip line within his office earlier this week, pledging to protect the anonymity of all who contact his staff in an effort to shed light on last Saturday's disastrous security breach.
In addition, whistleblower allegations suggest the majority of DHS officials were not in fact USSS agents but instead drawn from the department's Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). This is especially concerning given that HSI agents were unfamiliar with standard protocols typically used at these types of events, according to the allegations.
3. Were HSI agents properly trained in staffing these types of events?
doubtful the MSM will report on it and if they do they will gloss over it saying stuff like "it's normal and typical to use HS agents for details. They are all trained" etc.
Article: At least five US Secret Service agents have been placed on administrative leave following the attempt on Donald Trump's life in Pennsylvania, US media reports.
They include the head of the the Pittsburgh field office that coordinated security with local police, three other agents in the same office and a member of Trump's personal detail, according to the BBC's US news partner CBS.
Would seem to be pretty easy to prove/disprove, subpoena the duty roster from the event and the personnel files of those involved. Assuming their files are similar to DoD civilian personnel files, there will be a list all completed training, as well as mandatory training yet to be completed. Compare the training records of those suspected of not being properly trained to real USSS agents trained for/currently undertaking protection details.
Article: The Secret Service did not directly address the claims in response to a request for comment.
"The U.S. Secret Service respects the role of oversight. To date, we have provided over 1,500 pages of responsive documentation to Congress and have made employees available for transcribed interviews," Anthony Guglielmi, the agency's chief of communications, said. "These efforts will continue as our desire to learn from this failure and ensure that it never happens again is unwavering."
Big difference between a request (from a newspaper?) and a Congressional subpoena. A subpoena is backed by force of law. A request, regardless of who it's from, is not.
i didnt bold that. the point of my quote was they allegedly provided over 1500 documents. so quite likely personnel records are among those.
I did, to highlight "request" and compare/contrast it to "subpoena." "Quite likely" is speculation. The fact is we don't know what, if any, documents are/have been under review by Congress relative to the Trump assassination attempt. Also, no mention of "subpoena" in that USSS press release in the article you posted.
I disagree. Spurious allegations with no evidence should be dismissed.
Article: In addition, whistleblower allegations suggest the majority of DHS officials were not in fact USSS agents but instead drawn from the department's Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). This is especially concerning given that HSI agents were unfamiliar with standard protocols typically used at these types of events, according to the allegations.
...
please provide the following information no later than 7 days from now:
1. How did DHS determine to staff the event, including any decision to rely on state or local officers?
2. What percentage of the DHS agents at the event were from HSI rather than USSS? Were a majority of officers at the event drawn from HSI or other DHS components, rather than USSS? If so, why?
3. Were HSI agents properly trained in staffing these types of events?
Article: 07/19/24
Chairman Green Subpoenas DHS Secretary Mayorkas for Documents Regarding Attempted Assassination of Former President Trump
Article: Updated 10:16 PM EDT, July 21, 2024
Share
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has appointed a bipartisan, independent panel to review this month's assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, officials said Sunday.
The panel members will have "extensive law enforcement and security experience to conduct a 45-day independent review of the planning for and actions taken by the U.S. Secret Service and state and local authorities before, during, and after the rally, and the U.S. Secret Service governing policies and procedures," the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.
You're wrong here, lots of allegations/rumors get run to ground in such investigations, but aircraft mishap investigation isn't the topic. In any event, those "prerequisites" you mentioned are investigated to ensure compliance with mandatory requirements. So if your pilot was assigned/permitted to fly without meeting those mandatory training/currency requirements, he'd/she'd be no different than an agent assigned/permitted to protect a high value target without the mandatory training required by the USSS. The mandatory training/currency requirements set qualification standards.
We agree, such an unprofessional investigation would be amiss. Has a thorough investigation already been done? Will be done? By who? Should we be satisfied with an in-house investigation by the USSS, or any organization investigating itself for that matter, as opposed to an independent investigation?
It sounds as if some people were put on leave, but it is not at all clear if they are charged with (or merely suspected of) being remiss in their duties, or are just being used as scapegoats because someone in a high position demanded it. That may not be a thing that is publicized, but it happens. And although I agree with Duke, such demands may be the place that politics raises its ugly head.
there's no indication of either of those. it's just a normal thing companies or agencies or school systems etc do when some thing that needs to be investigated further arise.
Article: The five are still employed but are teleworking and are no longer allowed in the field. They cannot do any investigative work.
To ask a question that's going to be answered in due course anyway means the asker has motivations that go beyond seeking an answer.
so, half the clients had no sound all the time?
His election fraud narrative (he was the fist pumping scaredy-cat, wasn't he?) demonstrates that, at least historically, he has no interest in the truth.
That depends on exactly what he was told, and by whom. "I was told" could easily just be a complaint from a single person, and that ought to be the default interpretation of the phrase; other tenses, aspects, and voices exist to imply more than a single report (e.g. "I have been told" implies a habituality, and therefore repetition of the telling), and of course he could just be explicit, were he to want to communicate clearly. If what he said was turned into a bug report, I'd close it immediately as not having enough information to act on.
Hawley stokes fears that everybody's security detail is potentially badly trained.
Yes she was. That aside is akin to the "I was just asking" genre of smear.
I'mma ignore your post otherwise, but how big must your grudge be if you can't write "Kamala Harris, the Vice President, ...".
your personal belief that a vote for Biden= a vote for Harris , doesnt make her safer.
I'mma ignore your post otherwise, but how big must your grudge be if you can't write "Kamala Harris, the Vice President, ...".
Your gratuitous comment was not stuck in there to discuss her safety.
it very specifically was. she might have a target on her back as she wasn't voted in as the nominee. that was the point i was making. It is imperative her security detail is properly/well trained. Or do you disagree with that too?
External Quote:
did they address the allegations of their personnel not being fit for the job?
i dont recall hearing anything like that, but i watched it in full last Friday.
Article: 47:44
the fiscal year we're going to hire more than 400 special agents this year uh right now uh looks like we're going to
Article: CNN
—
Secret Service agents failed to take charge of decision-making for security at the Butler, Pennsylvania, rally where former President Donald Trump was shot in July, a bipartisan Senate committee revealed in a new report Wednesday, leading to key lapses in preparation and communication that day.
...
Some of the problems highlighted include the Secret Service failing to set up visual barriers around the rally that may have blocked shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks' view of Trump, the lack of a plan on how to secure the building the shooter took aim from and the general chaos of communication around the shooter's movement leading up to the attempt on the former president's life.
Homeland Security Committee Chairman Sen. Gary Peters told CNN Wednesday morning that his panel heard "a lot of finger-pointing" when they pressed Secret Service agents about who was in charge the day of the rally.
"That should be a very clear answer, and the problem is, there is no answer," Peters, a Michigan Democrat, said on "CNN News Central."
"That was astonishing to us. We could not find one point of contact who said, 'This was the person in charge,'" he added.
Article: "Overall, the lack of an effective chain of command, which came across clearly when we conducted interviews," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat who is leading the subcommittee's investigation, told reporters Tuesday. "It was almost like an Abbott and Costello farce, with 'who's on first?' finger pointing by all of the different actors."
In a statement Wednesday, Anthony Guglielmi, the Secret Service's chief of communications, said the report's findings are in line with the agency's own around the failures that day and highlighted the increased protection Trump has received since.
"Many of the insights gained from the Senate report align with the findings from our mission assurance review and are essential to ensuring that what happened on July 13 never happens again," Guglielmi said.
...
Those involved in security planning could also not agree on who – whether agents from the Pittsburgh field office, the office of protective operations or Trump's own Secret Service detail – was ultimately responsible for decision-making or how the process even worked.
26 mins he talks about relying less on Homeland security and other outside agencies.
