By Joshua Arnold

The first attempt to explain last weekend’s unconscionable security failures at Donald Trump’s Butler, Pa. rally left members of Congress deeply unsatisfied. After a conference call earlier this week with U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle and FBI Director Christopher Wray, legislators complained that the officials filled the time by talking about everything except their failures and left nearly no time for questions.

The discussion “did not give us satisfactory answers to some very important questions,” Senator Ron Johnson responded (R-Wis.). Rep. Pete Session (R-Texas) agreed on “Washington Watch,” “it did not really get into the issues that I would be interested in” having answered.

Following that uninformative hour, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) exhausted his last ounce of patience. “I’m prepared this morning to call on President Biden to fire Director Cheatle,” he declared. “Yesterday I said that she should resign. It’s clear that she has no intention to do so, but the oversight here, the mistakes, the ineptitude, whatever it is, was inexcusable.”

But, in the likely event that Biden declines to fire anyone, House Republicans are pursuing a Plan B. House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has subpoenaed Cheatle to testify before that committee, and she agreed to comply with the subpoena.

Worse and Worse

Cheatle’s acquiescence is a refreshing departure from the usual stonewalling conduct of Biden administration officials. She was likely compelled by the undeniable nature of the error, which even The Washington Post did not hesitate to acknowledge was “a major security failure.” As time goes on, the Secret Service comes off looking worse and worse as “outrageous new facts emerge every day.”

Within hours of initial media speculations about “loud popping” noises, rallygoers described to reporters how they saw a suspicious man on the roof and tried to alert law enforcement. This was soon confirmed by video footage shot at the scene. According to a synchronized video compilation, the crowd noticed the man at least two minutes before he began firing, and they first audibly alerted police 86 seconds before the shots. At least two named eyewitnesses said they tried alert the police, who were slow to heed their warnings.

Timeline of Failures

But, to tell the story the right way round, we must first return to a month before the incident, when the Butler rally was first being planned.

A month earlier — “The Secret Service came out here more than a month ahead of time,” recalled a Butler police officer. They “met with all the local agencies. They tell us exactly what to do, exactly what they want, and exactly how they want it. It’s all on them.”

This officer is a biased — or at least an interested — source. His agency was on-site, and he was particularly upset at Secret Service’s efforts to pass along the blame. However, his description rings true. Advance planning, total control — these are operational trademarks of the Secret Service.

5:07 p.m. — We fast forward now to the afternoon of the rally. About an hour before Trump began to speak, the assassin entered the rally venue’s security perimeter with a backpack and a rangefinder. The rangefinder set off the magnetometer, operated by Secret Service personnel. But the assassin was allowed to enter, and the item — commonly used by hunters but not itself a weapon — was not confiscated.

Around 5:07 or 5:08 p.m., Secret Service identified the shooter as “a character of suspicion because [he had] a rangefinder as well as a backpack,” Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) described after the conference call. “So, you would think, over the course of that hour, you shouldn’t lose sight of the individual. Somebody ought to be following up on those sorts of things. No evidence of that happening at all.”

For a time, there were plenty of eyes on Thomas Matthew Crooks. “A rooftop counter-sniper team would later report Crooks was scoping them out with his rangefinder while they watched him with theirs,” according to The New York Post.

But when he left the secure area, the would-be assassin apparently fell off the Secret Service radar.

5:45 p.m. — A quarter of an hour before Trump’s speech, someone with the Beaver County Emergency Services Unit photographed Crooks near his murderous perch on the roof of AGR International, according to The New York Post. A Beaver County police officer also photographed the assassin. The Washington Post reported that “local police” (department unspecified) alerted Secret Service at this time and sent them Crooks’s photo.

5:51 p.m. — Six minutes later, the Pennsylvania State Police alerted Secret Service about a suspicious person with a rangefinder. They didn’t know yet that he had a gun.

5:52 p.m. — CBS News then reports that Secret Service radioed the information to their counter-sniper team and other agents. At that point, Secret Service agents began “ actively looking” for the assassin, Fox News reports.

6:03 p.m. — Then Trump took the stage and began his speech. With the security situation still unresolved, the Secret Service allowed a major presidential candidate to take the stage. Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) asked the question we all want answered, “Why did they allow the president to take the stage, when they were looking for [Crooks] for 10 minutes?”

The Secret Service watched a man case out the venue with a rangefinder. They received further, independent reports that this same suspicious character was lurking just outside the secured area near an unmonitored roof. They established neither contact with nor surveillance upon this unknown threat. And still they allowed Trump to take the stage. Why?

6:09 p.m. — Six minutes into Trump’s speech, rallygoers saw an armed man on the roof and began screaming at law enforcement agents to do something about it.

A Butler County police officer did attempt to hoist himself up onto the roof, according to county sheriff Michael Slupe. Without a ladder close at hand, the officer improvised, getting a boost up by another officer, then grasping the edge of the roof with both hands. Crooks then aimed his gun at the officer hanging on to the edge of the roof. At this point, accounts diverge. According to Shupe, as quoted in The Washington Post, “he lets go because he doesn’t want to get killed.” An unnamed Butler officer told The Daily Mail that his comrade “reached for his gun, lost his balance, and fell. In any event, it seems that the officer broke his ankle when he slipped off the roof.

Regardless, the police were out of time. Indeed, it may have been this confrontation which catalyzed the fateful moment when Crooks began firing.

6:11 p.m. —The would-be assassin fired eight shots, killing one rallygoer, injuring two more, and hitting Trump in the ear.

At the very moment the shooting occurred, the special agent in charge was on the phone with local and state police about the threat, according to Barrasso. This, again, raises the question of why Trump was allowed on that stage at all.

Whose Building? Whose Responsibility?

As everyone from reporters to members of Congress try to analyze the shooting, the building and who was responsible for it have featured prominently.

The building belongs to American Glass Research (AGR) International. A company executive told The Washington Post that the company had coordinated with local police on event security. The company’s parking lot was blocked off for use by law enforcement. He also said there was no easy way to access the roof without a ladder. Crooks’s ladder appears to be positioned on the building next to this parking lot.

The reason why the building has caused so much controversy is that it was located outside the secure zone, the rally perimeter into which all attendees had to be screened. Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said on Sunday that Secret Service relied on local police units to fill out its team, including such roles as securing the outer perimeter.

However, in a rural location like Butler, Pennsylavnia, local resources can only stretch so far. The Butler Township Police Department contributed no security personnel, although they did have seven officers assigned to directing traffic. The Butler County Sheriff’s Office filled a few more roles, including the officer who nearly confronted Crooks on the roof. The nearby Beaver County Sheriff’s Office, having the largest SWAT team in the region, filled large gaps in the Secret Service ranks, and Pennsylvania State Police were also on the scene.

The question is, who was responsible for securing the AGR warehouse? Secret Service "was informed that the local police department did not have manpower to assist with securing that building,” insisted Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger. Although several officers were stationed inside and outside the building (but not on the roof), it’s still not clear whose officers they were or who, besides the Secret Service, was ultimately responsible.

Responsibility Admitted

That is, after all, the agency ultimately responsible for every aspect of security at any event involving a designated protectee — the Secret Service. “The agency’s failure is total,” exclaimed National Review’s Jeffrey Blehar. “A man is dead, two others were injured, the president was injured, and the social fabric of the country came within one lucky head-tilt of being rent asunder. And nobody is being held accountable for it.”

To clarify, real accountability for such a horrible blunder would result in at least one but possibly quite a few people losing his or her job.

Cheatle sort of acknowledged her responsibility in an interview this week, “The buck stops with me. I am the director of the Secret Service” — but then she pivoted away from either accountability or transparency — “and I need to make sure that we are performing a review and that we are giving resources to our personnel as necessary.”

Rather than dwell on the failures — some might argue, rather than seriously look at them — Cheatle preferred to highlight the quick response of agents once the shooting started. “The Secret Service moved quickly in this situation and neutralized the threat,” she lauded agents in a memo. She later doubled down in an interview, “Seeking that person out, finding them, identifying them, and eventually neutralizing them took place in a very short period of time.” Sure, but losing track of him, fruitlessly searching for him, and failing to spot him in an obvious location took even longer.

Don’t get me wrong, many Secret Service agents are consummate professionals and persons of upstanding character. Having lived in D.C. for more than five years, I know a few of them myself. But their individual competence and heroism cannot entirely cover for the corruption, incompetence, and partisanship. How can we answer the question without transparency? At the top.

Irresponsible Excuses

But after admitting responsibility (to an extent), Cheatle indulged in irresponsible excuses. First it was passing the blame due to a lack of manpower. “In this particular instance, we did share support for that particular site in that the Secret Service was responsible for the inner perimeter,” she claimed. “Then we sought assistance from our local counterparts for the outer perimeter. There [were] local police … that were responsible for the outer perimeter of the building.”

Then it was safety concerns about posting an agent on a sloped roof, just like the roofs on which other snipers were posted. “There’s a number of factors that come into play on how we secure buildings,” she said. “That building in particular has a sloped roof, at its highest point. And so, 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, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”

Note the deliberate passive voice: “decision was made.” A question everyone wants answered is, who made that decision? Because that person or group of persons deserves to be fired. The decisionmakers within the Secret Service know this, which is why they have yet to provide the answer to that question.

Concrete Criticisms

Despite the obfuscation by Secret Service brass, several concrete criticisms have emerged based on the information that is available.

One criticism deals with the protocols for protecting presidents and former presidents. As former Rep. Jason Chaffetz said, “Could there be a bigger threat profile than for President Biden and President Trump? That’s as big as it gets.” So, asked Sessions, “What was their countdown to making sure that things were okay?” We know that they knew about an ongoing security issue, so why didn’t they have a person responsible for “saying, before the president went on, ‘Everything is okay,’” he said. “What did they not do that would allow them, moments before the president would go on to say, ‘All points clear.’”

A second criticism is the Secret Service’s failure of planning. “How could someone get 130 yards [away] with a sniper rifle?” asked Sessions. “This is bad. Just terrible,” The Washington Post quoted a former senior leader of Secret Service presidential protection. “When the incident occurred, I was baffled when I heard the distance of the shot … How could that happen?”

Controlling the rooftops and lines of sight to the protectee is “the number one thing agents stress about,” said Jonathan Wackrow, former Secret Service detail leader during the Obama administration. Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe concurred that eliminating sight lines is “one of the most basic elements of providing security.”

The Secret Service clearly knew of this building because it was in the security plan. They could judge its distance and see its clear line of sight to the speaker’s platform across an open field. Yet they left its roof unguarded, and they clearly left approaches to the roof unguarded, too. The greatest protection detail on the planet was just outwitted by a 20-year-old who ran to Home Depot that morning.

A third criticism is Secret Service’s chronic manpower shortage. “We have a problem … with being able to make sure that they have the workforce, that they have the manpower, that they have the attention to the job which they perform,” said Sessions. “This will not be something that will be swept under the rug.” Chaffetz acknowledged that “they wear these agents out especially during the campaign. Part of what our report shows is they are spread too thin. Now they are apparently relying heavily on local police. With all due respect to local law enforcement, they are just not trained up to do this.”

Of course, the Secret Service is not the only law enforcement agency short on manpower. From police departments to the military, nearly every agency that trades in the legitimate use of force is struggling with recruitment and retention. Does it have something to do with the hostile cultural climate? Or with radically altered priorities, such as DEI, that minimize the agencies true mission?

Those questions are beyond the scope of this piece, and I leave them to the reader’s reflection. I’ll only note, while mentioning the Secret Service’s failures, that Cheatle seems far more “appalled” at the criticism of the Secret Service’s DEI objectives than she does about the glaring failures in performing their primary mission.

The Secret Service has weathered scandal after scandal, stretching back for decades, primarily by circling the wagons and remaining an impenetrable, unaccountable praetorian guard. That worked for a long time, but its greatest security lapse since the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan may force it to accept real accountability. If Donald Trump wins the election in November, he might even appoint a new chief who will clean house, rebuild its reputation, and restore its manpower.

For now, both Left and Right agree that the Secret Service lacks accountability. Conspiracy theories have abounded on Saturday’s shooting, from suggestions of an inside job to suggestions that Trump was never hit by a bullet.

But Blehar suggests that, “if there’s any conspiracy at play, it’s the most drearily obvious one: a conspiracy to hide just how dangerously incompetent the Secret Service has become at executing its most mission-critical task.”

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.