‘We’re Not Going To Make That Mistake Again’: Secret Service Head Assures Cornyn Post-Trump Shooting

last month

During a joint hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) questioned officials about the Trump assassination attempt and the shooter’s use of a drone.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:06Senator Cornyn.

00:07Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

00:11Director Rowe, can you explain why the shooter's drone worked?

00:15Because there was no counter UAS present, sir.

00:18Well, you had a drone system, but you had bandwidth problems.

00:23The bandwidth apparently was adequate for the shooter's drone, but not for the Secret

00:27Service.

00:29Can you explain that?

00:31I have no explanation for it, sir.

00:34We also know that in the military context, electronic warfare or jamming capabilities

00:40are commonly used on the battlefield.

00:44Does the Secret Service have jamming capabilities or drones?

00:53We have drones, sir.

00:54And when it comes to, I have to be very careful about how I answer this one in an open forum.

01:01What I can tell you is that we have technical security measures, sir, to address, I think,

01:05what you're asking me.

01:06Well, the question is, can you take down a suspicious drone?

01:13Because this can be used not only for surveillance by the shooter, which obviously it was here,

01:19but also drones can be weaponized and be used as a threat to the president, or in this

01:28case President Trump.

01:32Do you have the capacity to stop a weaponized drone?

01:38What I will tell you, sir, is that we have technical security measures that we utilize

01:43at permanently protective sites.

01:45We also have the ability in a limited fashion at temporary sites.

01:52What I can tell you is that on this day, the counter-UAS system had technical difficulties

01:57and did not go operational until after five o'clock.

02:00So in this case, the shooter had a rifle, but somebody who wanted to kill a president

02:08for former president or candidate for president would not need a rifle.

02:13They could use a drone, correct?

02:16It is a potential threat vector.

02:19So this individual was identified as a suspicious person.

02:23Can you explain to us when a suspicious person becomes identified as a threat?

02:32Well, I think it's also when a weapon or some other dangerous item is then presented.

02:41A rangefinder would not render someone a threat as opposed to somebody who was under suspicion?

02:50I think the rangefinder is what initially brought him to the attention of local law

02:55enforcement.

02:58And why would the president be allowed to take to the stage while a suspicious person

03:04had been identified and before the Secret Service or local law enforcement were able

03:08to investigate the circumstances?

03:10So at that time, Senator, suspicion had not risen to the level of threat or imminent harm?

03:17Well, you didn't – ultimately, that suspicious person did become a threat.

03:22Do you think if the president had been asked not to take the stage during the time it took

03:29to investigate, to eliminate that suspicion, that – wouldn't that have been the appropriate

03:36way to deal with it?

03:38Senator, it certainly is one way to do it.

03:40This is a challenge for law enforcement in general, is that being able to – you identify

03:48somebody that comes to your attention, and you're trying to determine what are – what

03:53are their intentions.

03:55This is a challenge for law enforcement.

03:57The individual was actually – came to the attention for suspicion.

04:01He's on the outer perimeter adjacent to the secured site.

04:08Law enforcement is circulating for him.

04:10But again, without additional information, at that point, we're not – we're not

04:16rising to the level yet where perhaps we should pull him off or delay him.

04:22And I'm just suggesting that maybe, just maybe, President Trump's appearance should

04:30have been delayed while that suspicion could be adequately investigated.

04:35But you – I've always thought of the Secret Service as the best of the best when

04:39it comes to their willingness to put themselves in harm's way to protect the life of their

04:44person they are detailed to.

04:47And I think you described the very rigorous process by which people are screened.

04:53And I think you mentioned the 2 percent standard.

04:56People who are interested in serving, only a very small fraction of those individuals

05:02are actually accepted in the Secret Service because of the high standards that your agency

05:08has.

05:09But explain to me why the Secret Service, being an elite law enforcement agency, would

05:13delegate to local law enforcement or others who did not meet that same 2 percent standard.

05:22In other words, isn't that something that Secret Service should have covered as opposed

05:26to delegating it to local law enforcement?

05:29So Senator, again, this is where I went back to earlier when I said it was a failure to

05:36challenge our assumptions.

05:38We assumed that the state and locals had it.

05:40By no means do I want to diminish the commitment, and I'm sure you agree, state and local law

05:46enforcement do their jobs every day and protect the communities that you represent.

05:50No doubt about it.

05:51So I think what we made an assumption that there was going to be uniform presence out

05:58there, that there would be sufficient eyes to cover that, that there was going to be

06:04counter-sniper teams in the AGR building.

06:08And I can assure you that we're not going to make that mistake again.

06:11Moving forward, I've directed our Office of Protective Operations that when our counter-snipers

06:16are up, their counter-snipers are up, and they're on the roof as well.

06:21And we have, we do this all the time with our colleagues in the New York City Police

06:26Department when we cover the United Nations General Assembly, and so that is our TTP moving

06:31forward.

06:32Director Rowe, I would just submit to you that those assumptions can be lethal.

‘We’re Not Going To Make That Mistake Again’: Secret Service Head Assures Cornyn Post-Trump Shooting

Category

Transcript

Recommended