The American people are over a week removed from the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, with few, if any, answers as to why it was allowed to happen. As a former Secret Service agent, I have three crucial questions that demand immediate answers.
1.
Who Was Responsible for Securing the Building?
A catastrophic failure occurred in defining and communicating who was responsible for securing the building where the shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, accessed the rooftop and fired at President Trump and rally attendees on Saturday, July 13th. The Secret Service typically defines and designates responsibility through a series of events known as the “7 Phases of Site Advance.” All agents are trained in this process before graduating from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Glynco, Georgia. We assess potential weaknesses and points of interest where a threat could emerge. The question arises: How did the information or specific assignments regarding the duties of the Butler Township Police Department become unclear?Simply put, the United States Secret Service is a Dual Mission Agency. It’s both investigative and protective. While the Investigative Mission was the agency’s original purpose in 1865, after the assassination of President William McKinley in 1901, the United States Secret Service began protecting America’s presidents, vice presidents, and other heads of state. Over the past decade, the United States Secret Service (USSS) has faced tremendous manpower strain due to limited resources. Numerous appeals to increase the budget for recruitment and enhance the agency’s technological capabilities have been unsuccessful. Many of these requests have been denied by the Department of Homeland Security and Congress. If granted, any increase was minimal to an already meager budget. Combined with the high demand for additional details required by current and past administrations, this strain has wreaked havoc on the agency, putting extra pressure on its obligation to keep protectees safe.
The last three administrations have all added additional protectees to the agency’s responsibility, burdening the men and women of the United States Secret Service. Yet, a tremendous strain on manpower persists, forcing the agency to rely heavily on local authorities to fill the gaps. I am confident that the investigation will reveal that the “rooftop” in question was identified as a concern by the Counter Sniper & Counter Assault Team, responsible for the tactical advance. However, due to manpower constraints, the outer perimeter posts are primarily manned by local counterparts. While the agency cannot function without their cooperation, the reality is that policing and security are not the same – one is primarily reactive and the other proactive and preventative.
By primarily using reactive local counterpart units, there has always been a disconnect regarding why we in the security industry, especially the United States Secret Service, perform tasks that those in the reactive industry typically handle. For instance, standing on the roof of a building in the hot sun for hours to ensure the integrity of the site before, during, and shortly after one of the agency’s protective visits. The fact that the shooter in Butler, Pennsylvania, slipped through the cracks is beyond comprehension. We need to know who made the call for the local counterparts to remain inside the building rather than on top of the roof. If the directive to be on top of the building was given by the agency, then why, prior to taking the stage or arriving at the site once the site posts were manned and the site was secured, was a correction not made?
2.
Why was President Trump allowed to take the stage at the time he did?
We must not assume, based on media reports, that the Secret Service and Butler Township police had information prior to President Trump taking the stage in Pennsylvania that Crooks was a person of interest. Based on the writing captured in the online gaming platform he used to describe his “premiere” being on July 13th, we cannot assume that anyone would know what his intentions were due to the vagueness of his post. We must ask how the information was processed by local authorities within his parents’ jurisdiction and if that information was relayed to Butler Township and subsequently to the Secret Service. Based on my knowledge, skills, training, and professional experience, that statement alone from the parents would not constitute a threat. We must wait until there is a full investigation to determine if the communications sequence of events is thoroughly examined to determine where the failure was and who is responsible.Crooks appears to have impulsively put together a hasty plan within the 24-36 hours prior to the event. The USSS, for almost 3 decades, has conducted extensive research on these events and commonly refer to this as “pre-attack planning.” According to reports, his parents notified authorities he was missing and potentially had ill intentions towards former President Trump. This is what we commonly refer to as leakage. There are now videos that have surfaced showing Crooks conducting what appears to be a site survey or reconnaissance. My question is: If the parents reported him to authorities and expressed his potential target as being President Trump, was that information relayed from the receiving agency to the Butler Township Police and further the protective detail?
Speaking from experience, it is common to have reports of an unknown suspicious person at protective sites. All efforts are made to locate the individual by the designated Counter Surveillance Team. If located, those individuals will be interviewed by the designated Protective Intelligence Team to determine their intentions. However, if the information were relayed and the authorities had an unknown suspicious person on the ground and there was an imminent threat, I believe the following questions would be appropriate to ask those in charge: * Why the rush to get the president on stage? * Why not delay? Protective assignments 101 would dictate that you would hold off on having the person you are assigned to protect with protecting be put in a potentially life-threatening position.
The truth is that it would have taken little effort to take a tactical pause, assess the situation, locate the person of interest, and prevent what the American people haven’t seen in 43 years – an assassination attempt on a president.
3.
When will USSS Chief Kimberly Cheatle speak to the American people?
According to reports, United States Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle will provide testimony before a Senate Panel this coming week to answer these questions. As a former agent, I know the agency has a “One Voice Policy,” which I agree with. However, this is a historic event. I, former colleagues, and others currently serving in the agency feel her lack of transparency and decision not to speak to the American people was a failure. We deserve better.To the men and women of the United States Secret Service, keep doing what you are doing. This is not a reflection of you but instead a reflection of failed policies, failed leadership, divisive politics, failed political appointments on numerous levels, and those within the agency in higher leadership roles. Some may have forgotten that it is you who breathe that breathes life into the agency. It is you that makes it happen on a day-to-day basis. Stay strong, lean on each other, band together, and keep your head on a swivel.
This country needs you, the silent protectors, the ones who sacrifice births, first steps, weekends, holidays, and other precious moments that we, as Americans, take for granted daily. You are the men and women in the arena. We need answers as to who knew what and when. My hope is that Director Cheatle can provide some insights for the American people and the men and women of the Secret Service.
Michael Matranga is a former United States Secret Service Agent assigned to the Special Operations Division, Counter Assault Team & Presidential Protective Division. He currently serves as the owner & CEO of M6 Global Defense, a consulting firm dedicated to protecting America’s children and workplaces.
