“Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle said Monday that her agency failed in its mission to protect former President Donald Trump, as lawmakers of both major political parties demanded during a highly contentious congressional hearing that she resign over security failures that allowed a gunman to scale a roof and open fire at a campaign rally.” AP News

‍

‍‍Both sides are critical of the Secret Service’s performance and call on Cheatle to resign:

‍

‍“Cheatle should have been gone the night of the attempted Trump assassination, and now is a symbol of the incompetence and lack of responsibility that has undermined trust in our institutions… When asked at the hearing why security personnel weren’t on the roof that the sniper used to shoot at Trump, Cheatle said law enforcement was supposed to provide over-watch, or observe it from above. ‘There was a plan in place to provide over-watch, and we are still looking into responsibilities, and who was going to provide over-watch,’ she said. Oh…

“When asked who decided that the rooftop would be outside the Secret Service perimeter, she answered, ‘I don’t have a specific person to identify for you.’ OK. When asked who approved the security plan for the rally, she couldn’t say, either. ‘It’s a conjunction of personnel,’ she explained. When precision and credibility were called for, Cheatle could manage neither.”

‍Rich Lowry, New York Post

‍

‍“‘That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point,’ Cheatle [told ABC News]. ‘And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof. And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.’…

“This makes no sense, on multiple levels. For one, the would-be assassin (a slight-looking 20-year-old with no evidence of any sort of combat training) managed to scale the building and get off multiple shots at Trump. Secondarily, the counter-sniper who ultimately took out the shooter was posted on a sloped roof. There is simply no excuse for a stunning failure that, but for a stroke of luck or act of God, would have ended up with Trump’s death, and all of the political and social turmoil that would have come with it.”

‍The Editors, National Review

‍

‍“The would-be assassin should never have been able to fire an AR-15-style rifle at the former president, nor even to climb onto the roof of a building near where Mr. Trump was speaking. But he did. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle has admitted, ‘It was unacceptable.’ That’s not enough. Her explanations have been beyond insufficient — indeed, they don’t make sense…

“Local law enforcement apparently spotted the shooter, flagging him as a suspicious person to the Secret Service an hour before he opened fire. At least three independent investigations are underway — by the FBI, Congress and the Department of Homeland Security. But no matter how they proceed, the Secret Service needs to give a full account soon and explain how the agency intends to adjust.”

‍Editorial Board, Washington Post

‍

‍“We know that at least one Secret Service sniper had a line of sight to the rooftop used by the shooter. As soon as shots rang out, Secret Service personnel ‘neutralized’ the shooter, Anthony Guglielmi, the agency’s chief spokesperson said. Theoretically, the Secret Service could have decided it would be responsible for covering the rooftop, while the local police would be assigned to prevent anyone from reaching the rooftop… [But] Mixed responsibilities for the same threat location can result in a lack of clarity…

“Further, The Wall Street Journal has reported, and the FBI has confirmed, that suspicious devices were found in the shooter’s vehicle, rendered safe by FBI bomb technicians and transported to the FBI Laboratory in Quantico, Virginia. Was the use of bomb dogs in the parking area of the rally considered? If so, who was responsible for doing that? To use bomb-sniffing dogs or not to use bomb-sniffing dogs would have been a Secret Service decision… The nation needs answers to several questions.”

‍Frank Figliuzzi, MSNBC

‍

‍“The prostitution scandal in Colombia in 2012, the drunk driving on the White House grounds in 2015, and the Chinese national with a malware-infected flash drive gaining access to Mar-a-Lago in 2019 were all terrible, but ultimately nobody got hurt. This time, one of the two major-party nominees for president was one flinch away from getting his head blown off on live television. It’s time to get serious about this failure of an agency…

“Congress should insist on higher ethical and professional standards for the Secret Service. After the Colombia scandal in 2012, the Secret Service made a new agency policy that agents should not drink alcohol ten hours before work and banned agents from visiting brothels and strip clubs. Why was that not already the standard? If the agency can only be shamed into raising its standards after a scandal is publicized, Congress should write higher standards into law and require semiannual reports demonstrating that the standards are being met."

‍Dominic Pino, National Review

‍

‍“In 2011, a man with a semiautomatic rifle was able to get close enough to the White House without detection to unload several rounds at the building. A few years later, in 2014, an armed intruder got over the White House fence, entered the building, and reached the East Room before the Secret Service caught up to him. In another breach, a Secret Service agent failed to do a bag check on a visitor without security clearance for a presidential event at a Los Angeles hotel, because he was watching a movie on his phone with an LAPD cop…

“[And now] the reporting so far [about the assassination attempt] paints a damning picture of an agency that can purchase troves of data on Americans’ locations, even from a Muslim prayer app, and yet apparently can’t fulfill the most basic function of securing a rooftop. In many ways, it calls into question the vast post-9/11 national-security apparatus consolidated under the Department of Homeland Security, armed with extensive surveillance powers that were justified in the name of keeping Americans and their representatives safe.”

‍Luke Goldstein, American Prospect