Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 23, 2024 - Viva & Barnes

03:33:31

Day 2 of Congressional Hearings into Trump Attempted Assassination - Viva Frei LIVE WITH COMMENTARY!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Troopers that were assigned that day were those participating in the motorcade to get former President Trump from his point of landing to the venue in Butler County and back with several other additional entities that were requested by the Secret Service.
	And then on site, we had to staff security posts that were determined by the Secret Service.
	All of those posts were inside of the secure perimeter of the Butler County Farm show.
	I guess I was one of those individuals who traveled to Butler.
	Just for my information, have you had any interaction with the FBI or anything as they look into the investigation as to what you or your men observed on that day?
	Yes, we're conducting an investigation.
	Largely in concert with and parallel to the Bureau, because the actions of crooks have federal legal implications and state law implications.
	Okay, thank you.
	President Yeltsin, your comments, you talked about the need for communication, you talked about FirstNet, and so we have federal, state, and local law enforcement.
	At an event like what we were talking about in Butler.
	But in our conversation with some of the locals, not state police, but the sheriff's department and the chief of police in Butler yesterday, those individuals did not have communication with actually state police or secret service.
	Would that, in your professional opinion, be a vulnerability for managing an event like this?
	Well, I think we can go back to 9-11 when we identified at that time that the inoperability of different agencies to be able to communicate really was a hindrance.
	there's an infrastructure in place now to address these, you know, in our operabilities, but at the same time, they're not always, uh, uh, Yeah, you know,
	we passed legislation mandating Obviously, first net interoperability, and we tied funding to make sure that that happened.
	But here we are looking at this situation, and we picked up some valuable information that we're still not where we need to be on that.
	Can you imagine trying to rationalize having not secured the roof of a building?
	Oh, it was just, we're still not yet there.
	The role of the state police is invaluable, but it appeared in talking with some of the local officials, as you say, it's just, you're not primary, you're kind of secondary in that role, that we need to somehow, as a committee, look at how do we enhance the overall mission.
	So that we have no gaps.
	So I look forward to...
	Gaps. Just a gap in security.
	Like they didn't know that they needed to do what they needed to do.
	Look at the after-action review to close those gaps.
	So just to tell you one, Butler, Pennsylvania has no permitting process for events of that size.
	So you can announce it and hold it.
	And local government doesn't really have anything to do with it.
	And we were assured by local government that they would try to fix that.
	They said we have to be more involved in events of this size so that if this was not the best venue, then that permitting could have gotten in.
	engaged and suggested it was the best venue those kind of things so thank you very much I yield back yeah you didn't say very much Benny Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	I want to thank you for the site visit that we had at Butler, Pennsylvania yesterday.
	One more than the now-resigned Kim Cheadle.
	Eye-opening, educational.
	I agree with the ranking members' comments in terms of...
	After 9-11, connecting the dots in federal, state, and local, working together was the answer.
	I led a joint terrorism task force when I worked at the Department of Justice, and I also was involved in national security events, so I kind of know how these things operate.
	My question is to Colonel Parris.
	It's standard practice that the lead federal agency will come in and meet with the state and locals regarding the security plan before the event, prior to the event.
	Sir, did you participate or did your department participate in that?
	So I did not participate.
	As I stated earlier, there were two commanders dedicated to those two primary roles, the motorcade and the staffing of the posts on.
	Within the secure perimeter, as well as a state police area commander.
	So just as a way of background, our area commander that covers multiple troops in that area of the state, out of nearly 5,000 troopers, there are only four area commanders.
	So that major was present for the walkthrough on the 11th.
	And were your troopers assigned inside the perimeter or outside?
	Inside. Inside.
	And was he outside within the jurisdiction of the local police?
	So just as a point of clarification, there were two on the operations plan, there were two marked cars that were assigned roving duties, which would primarily, as the name implies, be outside of the secure perimeter on roadways responding to incidents that potentially could occur as a result of a congregation of that many people.
	So we saw, we walked into, we actually walked onto the roof where the sniper was.
	A clear eyes on, clear shot.
	Of the president.
	And they had a clear shot of the guy.
	A tree blocked the Secret Service's view.
	This kid did some investigation.
	He had a drone out there days prior.
	Got an aerial surveillance of the premises.
	And that position was probably the best position outside the perimeter, as far as I can tell.
	There's also water tower.
	Outside the perimeter.
	That would have been a perfect spot for Secret Service.
	Were you aware of any presence of Secret Service in this water tower?
	I was not.
	And you're aware of what I'm talking about?
	How far away was the water tower?
	I physically flew out there on Saturday the 13th.
	It was still very much an active crime scene, so I did not walk the roofs.
	On the adjacent building, we got a tour of that as well, where I believe the local police were positioned.
	There were three windows.
	The first one had a plain view of where the sniper would be.
	However, they were stationed in the second and third windows.
	Are you familiar with this at all?
	I am not from the standpoint that I have not seen the Secret Service's operations plan and our deference would be to them to assign Butler ESU.
	They were apparently local counter snipers.
	Do you know if they should have been assigned to the rooftop?
	I would defer to the there are many ways that you can cover.
	Obviously positioning people on the rooftop would be one of those.
	He's not testifying as the commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police.
	Way too close.
	So not secrecy.
	He should never have been allowed to get on top of that building.
	And I don't know how, and I know he was on your radar inside the perimeter.
	You seem to have lost him, and somehow he finds his way up to the rooftop unimpeded until a local law enforcement officer crawls on top of the roof and looks at him, and he points his AR-15 at him.
	My question to you is, what was the communication like that day?
	Typically, Secret Service has one channel for them, the other channel for state and locals.
	Was there any communication to identify, hey, this is not a local police officer.
	This is, in fact, an unidentified individual on the rooftop.
	Was that communicated to the Secret Service?
	So my belief, as I sit here today, is that we did have integrated communications from members that were inside of the Secret Service command post.
	Completely deferential to the ongoing nature of the investigation.
	I have an understanding of a sequence of events, but I would like to draw a distinction between a sequence of events.
	So my theory is that they thought maybe he was an officer, but then they find out he's not.
	The thing you find interesting is that the counter-sniper secret service, within seconds of the shots on the president, kills the suspect.
	That tells me he had him.
	In his sights, maybe he's not aware of who the individual was.
	I did read that they called it a one in a million spot.
	I know within seconds after the shots were fired at the president, the threat was eliminated.
	And, you know, lastly, I just want to end with this.
	This was actually astonishing, and I want to get your confirmation.
	He had a detonation device with him and two of his bombs.
	We're located in his car that was parked on the other side of the perimeter.
	Seems to me a good theory would be that he was going to kill the president and then detonate his car, causing a diversion, and then escape from the crime scene.
	Are you aware of any of this?
	I am aware of the presence of the device on his person.
	We were aware of that very early on, and that was a...
	A serious tactical consideration in the hours, in the immediate aftermath, as we work that crime scene.
	But to your point about his ultimate theory, or what his ultimate motivation was, that remains under investigation.
	And he had a rangefinder on him as well.
	What his ultimate motivation was?
	My God, it's a sick joke.
	Gentleman Yields, I now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Swalwell.
	Oh, Swalwell, let's see what Swalwell has to say.
	Violence has never been the answer.
	Oh, shut your face.
	And I thank both of you for your service in law enforcement and testifying today.
	This is the guy that was banging a Chinese fly.
	Violence has never been the answer.
	This is the guy that threatened nukes to fight Second Amendment.
	Not on a certain day in January and not on a day in July.
	Oh, they've got to bring it back to January 6th.
	These are scumbags of the highest order.
	Remember, I was 12 years old and my dad was on the way to school on a cold day in January.
	And my dad, who was a cop, He stopped me as I was about to leave and he wanted me to watch the television.
	His guy had just lost a presidential election and some young kid from Arkansas was about to be sworn in as the new president of the United States.
	My dad was burned.
	He really liked George Bush.
	He did not like Bill Clinton.
	But he told me to stop and watch the television coverage.
	Of the inauguration because he said, look at that.
	Look at that, son.
	He said, that's what makes us so special.
	My guy lost.
	This guy's getting sworn in.
	And not a shot has been fired.
	This is coming from the guy who tried to take down President Trump since he got elected.
	Violence has never been the answer.
	It's despicable that somebody thought they could take a shot at the former president.
	Yeah, you don't do it that way.
	You do it with Russiagate hoaxes.
	We don't know much about the political beliefs of this individual.
	We know he was a 20-year-old male, registered Republican.
	Had a gun.
	A registered Republican.
	What a piece of scum Squalwell is.
	Also had researched President Biden.
	Donated to Biden.
	Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
	We don't know what led...
	This madman to try and kill the former president.
	But it's despicable.
	And the people who went to that rally deserved to hear, without violence, the candidate that they were supporting.
	Commissioner Paris, I'm sorry this happened to your community.
	I'm sorry this happened to the person who died and the persons who've been wounded.
	I just want to understand, though, because we are a country that is armed to the teeth, how many firearms were within the perimeter, just by the back-of-the-envelope estimate?
	Back-of-the-envelope estimate?
	The only firearms of which I'm aware that were inside of the perimeter were those in the possession of law enforcement.
	And would you estimate that was hundreds or dozens?
	I would only feel comfortable not having seen the Secret Service.
	He's going to say, oh, they had hundreds of guns and they couldn't stop a bad guy with a gun.
	That's where he's going.
	How many rounds did the shooter...
	Fire before he was killed.
	Do you know?
	Good question.
	I believe that the number is eight casings have been recovered.
	I also understand the emotions around this assassination attempt, but I am not going to allow some, and I say some, the chairman of this committee is a serious legislator who wants answers.
	Some are not.
	And some are trying to rewrite what has happened in our country over the last eight years.
	Erase what happened in this building on January 6th.
	Oh my God, back to January 6th.
	One member of this body in Congress said the Republican district attorney in Butler County should immediately file charges against Joseph Biden for inciting assassination.
	Another... I don't think...
	The left doesn't get irony.
	Justice Kavanaugh and now President Trump, for years Democrats and their allies Existential threats.
	They've compared him to Hitler.
	They've tried to lock him up.
	A radical shift in what has really happened in our country.
	In fact, the former president's current vice presidential nominee Is the one who said that Donald Trump might be America's Hitler, might be a cynical a-hole, cultural heroine he's responsible for, nauseous and reprehensible.
	I joined the chairman in seeking unity as the antidote to political violence.
	Unity as the antidote to political violence.
	But we're not going to erase and rewrite and allow some to reincarnate themselves.
	As victims of what happened.
	We can't let this ever happen again.
	We must arm law enforcement and have better security perimeters.
	But in this country, violence has never been the answer.
	I yield back.
	Oh, shut your mouth.
	By the way, I'm just looking it up.
	I don't think there's any public statements where J.D. Vance compared Trump to him.
	Mr. Guest for his five minutes.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	And gentlemen, thank you for both being here today.
	You both classified as what happened on July 13th as critical failures.
	I would expand that and say it was a colossal failure.
	And I think you have both stated that the ultimate responsibility for what occurred that day falls upon the Secret Service.
	Colonel Paris, I know that your officers were there in a support role.
	You were following the operational plan set out by Secret Service.
	You testified that the primary responsibilities for your officers were motorcade and then the interior perimeter and that you had two roving officers there really just out there to provide support if necessary.
	You mentioned earlier that you went to the scene on the 13th and thank you for going there and being a part of that.
	And you also testified earlier that you have not been provided the operational plan by the Secret Service.
	Is that correct?
	That's correct.
	We haven't received it yet.
	When did you request that?
	I'd have to go back and check in the earlier part of the investigation.
	That was just something that we asked for as a matter of course.
	We were not told no.
	We just, to date, have yet to receive it.
	And that would be important, would it not, if you're going to investigate what happened on that day.
	The operational plan, that is the starting point for all the events that later transpired.
	Is that correct?
	Well, I don't want to overstate the role of the state police here is to investigate the three Pennsylvanians that were shot and the use of force by the Secret Service counter-sniper.
	To the extent that we need to know the sequence of events leading up to that.
	We obviously would like to know as much as we can, but it's not our role to do an after-action report on the secret.
	Well, but all the shootings occurred simultaneously.
	The same shot that struck President Trump, one of those shots killed one of your fellow citizens, and two others were injured.
	So you can't separate the two.
	This is one investigation into a shooting that occurred in which one of your citizens were killed.
	Two more were fatally injured.
	In which the president himself was struck.
	And so the fact that the Secret Service is stonewalling your investigation, that they're not providing you this information.
	We saw the testimony yesterday from the Secret Service director where she refused to answer questions and has now resigned.
	I find that to be especially troubling.
	We have the Secret Service not wanting to cooperate with Congress, not wanting to cooperate with a fellow law enforcement agency.
	And I personally find that troubling.
	As we look, and as you are aware from speaking to your officers that were there physically on the scene that day, did Secret Service, did they have any drones in the air so that they could have an eye in the sky and see what was happening to your knowledge?
	Any drones?
	To my knowledge, I am not aware that they were using drones.
	And does your agency have drones?
	We do maintain some drones.
	So if Secret Service would have requested your agency to fly drones that day, you would have been able to do so, is that correct?
	We would have endeavored to try to honor that request, yes sir.
	And you testify that you've been to the scene of the shooting.
	Did you see the water tower that's located approximately 100 yards from the building where the shooter fired those shots?
	I did see it, sir.
	And would it have been possible to have put an officer, and again, that's not your responsibility to do that, that's the Secret Services, but would it have been possible to put an officer there looking down on the scene of the rally and the building where the shooter occurred?
	Would that have been something that would have been possible to do?
	Presuming that there's a way to access the water tower.
	I didn't walk over.
	I was probably several hundred yards away, so I can't say that I could.
	And if you had an officer up there, that would have provided you a strategic viewpoint of the events that were transpiring below, correct?
	I would agree.
	Tactics height gives a tactical advantage, yes, sir.
	And then I want to ask you also about the roof where the shooter was located.
	You said you didn't go on the roof, but you viewed the roof.
	Is that correct?
	You will never know how many spent cases were on the roof.
	The Secret Service Director prior to her resignation said that she did not put anybody on the roof because it had a sloped roof.
	It would have created a safety concern.
	I was in Butler, Pennsylvania yesterday with many members of this committee.
	My fellow member, Carlos Jimenez, who is 70 years old, and I guess he doesn't mind me saying that since he has put that information out there.
	There's video of him easily transversing the roof, walking across the roof, and even though he is some 50 years older than the shooter.
	And so my question is, do you agree with the assessment of the former Secret Service director that the roof was so sloped I can't agree with that statement, sir.
	All right.
	Thank you very much.
	I'm out of time and I yield back.
	Gentleman yields.
	I now recognize Mr.
	Craya for five minutes of questioning.
	Thank you, Mr.
	Chairman. I want to thank you and the ranking member for putting together the trip to Butler yesterday.
	trip.
	Colonel Paris, thank you for hosting us out there.
	I certainly hope that the Secret Service does cooperate with us in our investigation as to what went wrong.
	Secret Service has to be 100% correct all the time.
	There's small force, 2300 plus maybe 1300.
	So you local, state, local police officers are the force multiplier.
	And to hear you say that Miscommunication was an element here is unacceptable.
	Giving him the benefit of the doubt.
	He's a Democrat.
	He's starting off a fine.
	FirstNet was put together post-9-1-1.
	It's a little bit over 20 years ago.
	And to hear that we still don't have the technology for people on the ground to talk with each other is a concern.
	It's even a greater concern to me when I was taking a tour of those That farm in Butler, Pennsylvania yesterday, I had local law enforcement officers, local electeds, coming to me, whispering to me, there's more here to the story.
	We need to talk about what actually happened.
	To have people that were on the ground there, concerned, afraid of stepping forward is unacceptable.
	To tell us of other failures that maybe this committee does not know about yet, that were part of what happened in Butler, Pennsylvania, is unacceptable.
	I asked one of the officers, safety officers, could you talk?
	The Secret Service said, no, we can't communicate.
	It took us 15 minutes to communicate with them.
	Local elected official who said, I have other stories I need to talk to you about.
	Let me have a moment.
	Ladies and gentlemen, we're four and a half months away from this election.
	Pennsylvania is a battleground state.
	You will have these kinds of events again.
	And to know that we don't have the facts, let alone execute a plan to fix the holes, is unacceptable to our democracy and to our country.
	We can talk about the facts.
	The facts are a lot of things went wrong.
	Everything went wrong.
	Let's talk about how to fix it.
	No, let's talk about how it went wrong.
	I think we start with accepting the fact that things went wrong and that we need more resources.
	Oh, that's what it is.
	It was resources why you didn't have a sniper on the roof.
	Your volunteers, your officers that you put on the line to help the Secret Service, are they actually compensated somewhere for their overtime, their extra time they're out there?
	They're in a paid status, yes.
	We assign them to those duties.
	They're chalking it up to a lack of resources?
	Why they didn't secure that building?
	Bullshit. So let me ask you something.
	In the minute and a half I have left, one of the local officers there, after we spoke a while, I said, well, let me summarize what you just told me.
	You're asking me who's in charge.
	And he asked me, yeah, I want to know who's in charge.
	I said, well, let's talk some more.
	And he said, Lou, we don't know if it's the campaign or the Secret Service that's in charge here.
	He said, if I called for a row of dump trucks to be put up behind the stand, it wouldn't happen because the optics would not be good for a campaign rally.
	I want to know who is in charge protecting our national candidates.
	And Mr. Chairman, I'd like to see if we can ask those tough questions.
	This is not a Democrat or Republican issue.
	This is about trying to come up with some rules, protocol, to make sure this does not happen again.
	After the events, we can sit here, we can point fingers at each other.
	And talk about partisanship.
	It's not going to fix our democracy, our electoral system.
	Mr. Chairman, I do hope we go back and talk to a lot of those folks who are not here today, who wanted to talk, who weren't invited, and a lot of people, even if we invite them, are not going to talk.
	Because, frankly speaking, they want to keep their heads down as the shooting continues.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield.
	Keep their head down as the show.
	What was it?
	Okay. Gentleman yields.
	I now recognize Mr. Bishop for five minutes.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Colonel Paris, are you aware whether any law enforcement officer or officers was or were posted in the second floor window of the AGR building?
	Good question.
	I am aware, yes, sir.
	Okay, what's the answer?
	To my knowledge, there were two posted there from Butler ESU.
	And you said Butler ESU.
	What does the acronym ESU stand for?
	Emergency Services Unit.
	It's a team that's comprised of multiple agencies that pool resources on a county or several county basis in order to enhance capabilities and training and be able to respond.
	Basically, a mutual aid agreement is my understanding of it.
	Is it sort of like a SWAT team?
	They are trained in SWAT tactics, to my knowledge.
	So how many ESU officers were posted to that second floor window?
	So I am aware that two were in the building, but again, I have not seen the Secret Service.
	Two in the building.
	Well, you say in the building.
	Were they in a window out onto the scene?
	From briefings that I have been given, I was told they were in a window, yes, sir.
	Did they remain on post?
	I was told that at a certain point, they began searching along with other local officers in the immediacy before, after Crooks had been identified as suspicious by them.
	By them?
	My understanding is that they identified Crooks for not matriculating.
	To my knowledge, Crooks never made it through the secure perimeter into the...
	The venue space itself.
	He was identified by those members as suspicious, in part because of that.
	And then at some point, he produced the rangefinder, which heightened that suspicion.
	So Representative Crane took a video on site yesterday.
	I'd like staff to put that up.
	It's just very short.
	I was literally just looking for this video myself.
	Here, I found it.
	This is going to be the video from the window of the building.
	If I understand correctly, this is from the second-story window of the AGR building.
	You can see that window comes out from the sash and swings out to the right.
	There's an aerial photo right after Crooks was killed, where Crooks' body is on the roof, and that window was open.
	Was it from this vantage point that those ESU officers spotted Crooks?
	I don't know that particular window, but my understanding is from a second-story window is where he was initially spotted.
	Okay. So are you then saying that, to your knowledge, those ESU officers left the location where they could look out the window to go in search of this person?
	That is my understanding.
	So between the time he was spotted on the ground and identified as someone suspicious, Until the shooting, they had left that post to go look for him.
	Is that what you're saying?
	My understanding is, yes, along with other municipal officers that responded to that area.
	And that's based on interviews that we've conducted, and I want to be very clear that I don't want to establish a timeline minute by minute because we don't have that yet.
	I think that's revelatory.
	I haven't heard that information.
	A local news station.
	Well, there's a local news station report from July 17 that says that local law enforcement were told they couldn't be responsible for securing the AGR building during the Trump rally.
	And, of course, you've testified a moment ago or earlier in this hearing that it was your understanding that the meeting with the Secret Service on the site was that ESU was going to handle the AGR building.
	Which is it?
	Do you know?
	My understanding is what my initial answer was.
	Okay. You also, in response to Mr. McCall, you started to say something.
	You were saying that you did have integrated comms, and you were saying you were deferring to the ongoing investigation, but you have an understanding of the sequence, and then he cut you off and went on to another question.
	Do you know what you were about to say?
	Do you remember that?
	Just that we had members of PSP inside of the Secret Service command post, and we were maintaining communication with our people.
	Had ESU maintained position in that window overlooking the roof, isn't it true that they would have had a clean shot at Mr. Crooks as he was ascending the roof to his shooting position?
	I'm not prepared to say that because I don't know the exact timeline of events.
	But it's your understanding, though, that they were no longer in that room where they had been previously overlooking the building at the time he was ascending the roof.
	Is that correct?
	Could you repeat that question?
	The ESU officers were no longer in that room where they could look out the window and oversee the roof as that video shows.
	I believe they were actively searching along with additional municipal officers for Mr. Crooks.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	My time's expired.
	Outrageous. Gentleman Yields, I now recognize Mr. Carter.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	And thank you to our witnesses for joining us today.
	As we convene to discuss the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump and its profound implications on a nation's political landscape, it is imperative that we recognize the growing threats to our homeland.
	The failure of the Secret Service to protect former President Donald Trump must be thoroughly investigated and addressed to ensure such an incident never happens again.
	Violence has no place in political discourse, regardless of our philosophical differences, our parties, or our beliefs.
	We must stand united against such actions and uphold the principles of democracy and respect.
	What happened on that day was an incredible breach, a threat to our nation because one of our leaders were placed in harm's way.
	Secret Service has a principal role, and that is to provide protection for our party leaders, rather they're Republican, Democrat, or other.
	Rather they are someone that we agree with or someone we disagree with.
	It's not a luxury.
	It's a necessity.
	It's an imperative.
	And while we all have lots of questions, it appears abundantly clear that the two of you...
	And while we appreciate you being here, own no responsibility to the breach.
	And I respect the fact that the questions that are coming to you are very difficult for you to answer because you have limited facts.
	But I do appreciate your presence.
	I appreciate your leadership.
	I appreciate what you do.
	And for all the men and women in uniform, we thank you for putting your lives on the line to protect us.
	I will ask this general question.
	If you were in charge...
	Can you say what you might have done differently?
	I would defer to the Secret Service from the standpoint that our expertise in the Pennsylvania State Police is not primarily focused on full-time dignitary protection, sir.
	I would endeavor generally to try and put whatever resources and partnerships in place to maintain and ensure the safest event we possibly could.
	Do you believe that the coordination failed between agencies?
	Again, I can only comment on the state police portion at this point.
	We continue to learn more 10 days in, and I have not seen the Secret Service operations plans.
	Mr. Yones, can you join us and share any light in your expertise on where we are and how can we make sure this absolutely never happens again, regardless of who might be at the podium?
	A president is a president is a president.
	I cannot agree with you more.
	In this situation, if I'm speaking on behalf of local law enforcement or state law enforcement, I would say that, again, the...
	Primary responsibility of making these calls, making these decisions, and making the operations plans going to be the Secret Service.
	As I mentioned earlier, there are some 19,000 agencies across this country.
	It would be impossible to have any continuity or any consistency with what we do in protecting our leaders.
	So Secret Service would have to play a huge role in this part.
	If you're asking me personally what I would have done different, obviously I look at a...
	An assessment of the situation and look at all of the elevated positions that were in place.
	They should have been part of a contained area.
	But that's just my own personal view of not seeing news reports and not physically being on site.
	I have never served in any form of law enforcement.
	But I think I would have figured that that perimeter should have been tighter.
	I think I could have figured out that there's no way that that building where the shooter sat, laid, and aimed.
	Should not have had snipers on top of it as well, negating any opportunity for a shooter to be there.
	Notwithstanding that there should have been a sweep of the area, we should have had our people on that building as a point of view.
	But there were people looking at that point.
	And as I said, a president, a president, a president, a former president, a former president, a former president, a cabinet secretary, a leader.
	We deserve to have answers to these questions because when we don't have answers...
	Those who would rather divide and create theater by saying things that aren't true and they know aren't true.
	Distorting facts and trying to suggest that somehow people played an active role.
	Listen, the American people deserve the truth.
	Do you hear what this guy just said?
	And so I am imploring that we have somebody at these tables that can answer the questions, the good, the tough, the uncomfortable.
	This guy doesn't realize he just contradicted himself.
	Because the American people deserve to know.
	This is something that should have never happened.
	And we as a committee, in a most bipartisan fashion, should stand together to make sure that we send a message always, that we will always protect our leaders, whether we agree with them or not.
	Mr. Chairman, I yield.
	The gentleman yields.
	I now recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Jimenez, for five minutes.
	Let me just do this.
	I'll pause it here.
	That guy just said there should have been someone on that building.
	That should have been in a tighter perimeter.
	Need to answer questions so that people stop spreading disinformation that someone was in on it.
	You kind of just confirmed that someone was in on it, either passively or actively, by leaving that roof unsupervised, unmanned.
	And then the snipers who had a view on that roof, I'll show you an image later, magically not there when the sniper was taking a shot.
	Yeah. Dude, you might have just proven the point that you thought you were disproving people were in on this.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Colonel Paris.
	You said the United States Secret Service, Penn State Police was there, Butler ESU was there.
	Any other law enforcement agency there?
	According to the operations plan that PSP put together, there were elements from Butler County Sheriff.
	Deputy Sheriffs were on some of those interior posts, and thus they were on our...
	I just need the answer.
	I apologize.
	There are additional ones that I could name would be...
	Butler County sheriffs were in our operations plan.
	Pittsburgh City Police provided assets to the motorcade, and I believe Allegheny County Police also.
	You said that you were in the incident command center, that your agency was in the incident command center with the Secret Service.
	Yes, sir.
	Were all the other agencies in that command center?
	I believe that some of those agencies were represented, but I can't definitively tell you.
	We need to find the answer to that.
	Was Butler ESU in that command center?
	I was told at one point that there was a representative in there how long and over what period.
	I'm not sure.
	I'm aware of three.
	So the agency that's in charge of the outside perimeter, actually the agency in charge of the greatest threat.
	Because when you stand at the podium, and I stood there, and when you look, all you have to do is look around.
	You see that building?
	It's 100 yards away.
	It's elevated.
	Direct line of fire to the president.
	I stood on that roof.
	No problem standing on my roof.
	I saw that video.
	Yes, I am 70 years old.
	Okay. Good-looking 70-year-old.
	So, the timeline is very important here.
	If, in fact, they thought that Mr. Brooks was so suspicious that they actually pulled the ESU countersnipers away, because there were countersnipers, what I understand, in that window.
	A way to look for him.
	And from my understanding of the timeline, it's about 20 minutes before the president came out.
	Even comes out.
	Was that information relayed to the Secret Service?
	That they were looking for a suspicious individual and that people had been pulled away to look for that suspicious individual.
	Was that relayed to the Secret Service?
	I believe that it was.
	And was that relayed to the Secret Service, the team that surrounds the president himself?
	I can't answer that.
	Well, if it wasn't, that's another big mess-up.
	And I can tell you, this is just one of a bunch of mess-ups that I've seen.
	One of the questions that I have is, why in the world was that team from ESU in the building to begin with?
	Why weren't they on a rooftop?
	It was a hot day.
	It was a hot day, right?
	And so...
	That's another question that I'm going to ask.
	Why were you assigned inside a building when you have a little window that's like this big, right?
	And your line of sight out of that window, unless you stick your head out of the window, is pretty limited.
	Your view.
	So why were you inside, not outside?
	Who said for them to be inside and not outside?
	Let them answer now.
	What did the Secret Service tell the...
	You were inside the perimeter, right?
	Yes, for the most part.
	You were inside the perimeter.
	Me personally?
	No, no, no.
	I'm saying your agency was inside the perimeter.
	But actually the threat, the biggest threat, was outside the perimeter.
	And so who developed a plan to protect the outside of the perimeter?
	No, it should have been in the perimeter.
	That's the United States Secret Service.
	Because you really can't ask the local agency to do that because they're not in the business of dignitary protection.
	They don't do it all the time.
	You don't do it all the time.
	They do it all the time.
	So, Mr. Chairman, we're going to need...
	Doug, if you want to hear this without commentary, go listen to ABC News or Fox.
	We need a timeline.
	Who said what to who?
	And what the action that was taken.
	You know, one thing that I noticed in another video, and I've got to find out if it's true, and it appears to be true, is that the snipers on the south side reposition to look to the north side.
	And I want to know what the timeline for that was.
	How far in advance were the snipers, the counter snipers on the south side told, hey, you need to look at a threat on the north side?
	And how much time was there between that and then the shots being fired?
	Do you have any information on that?
	I do not have a specific timeline.
	That's the information that we need.
	It's not unusual to have people on different frequencies.
	Actually, you have to because you have so many people, but you have to have everybody in the same place so they communicate with each other.
	So we need to know if everybody that was in charge or had responsibility for protecting not only the interior perimeter, but outside the perimeter, if they were all in that incident command center.
	And if they weren't, that's a huge problem, too.
	Thank you.
	You're back.
	The gentleman yields.
	I now recognize Mr. Magaziner for five minutes.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	And first, I just want to join my colleagues from both sides of the aisle earlier who recognized the tremendous legacy of our colleague, Sheila Jackson Lee.
	Who I feel very fortunate to have had even just a year and a half to work with on this committee.
	She always came prepared.
	She was diligent.
	She brought empathy and was a great example to us.
	She spent her dying moments tweeting out toxic vitriol against Trump.
	And I also join my colleagues on both sides.
	In condemning the assassination attempt.
	Oh, thank you.
	We were curious.
	And condemn all acts of violence.
	Oh, you condemn all acts of violence?
	Good for you.
	Our condolences go out to the family of Corey Comparator and all who were injured and traumatized by what occurred that day.
	And, you know, I think about the children who were at that event and had to witness that.
	And that is something they will carry with them for the rest of their lives.
	We don't know the motivation.
	Of course not.
	But I remain concerned by the rising tide of political violence and domestic violent extremism in this country, which impacts all of us.
	This is something that some of us have been talking about a lot in this committee.
	In 2023, the U.S. Capitol Police investigated more than 8,000 cases of direct threats against members of Congress, a tenfold increase from 2015.
	And so I ask everyone, take down the rhetoric.
	Remove violent rhetoric from our political discourse.
	Who is this guy?
	I'd like to see what his Twitter feed looks like.
	Remember, as President Lincoln said, that we are not enemies but friends, and we have to appeal to the better angels of our nature.
	Except some of your friends try to assassinate you every now and again.
	We have to make sure that this never happens again.
	It is welcome news that the director of the Secret Service has resigned, but if we say that that is enough, then we're not doing our jobs.
	Okay, I agree with you there.
	We need to understand what protocols, policies, resources need to be changed.
	If any, to make sure this does not happen again.
	They need to be respected, you dumb.
	I wanted to ask, I imagine the Pennsylvania State Police deals with lots of events like this, right?
	You have lots of political events, big events, Secret Service protectives who come in and out of Pennsylvania.
	So can you just help us understand, is it unusual to have such a small perimeter around an outdoor event like this one?
	I would say that we routinely, as a matter of course, exercise deference to the Secret Service to set the perimeter for an event like this based on the protectee.
	Yeah, I think it's important to note that Pennsylvania is a state where anyone 18 and above can carry a firearm without a license.
	It's an open carry state.
	And so my second question is, outside of that perimeter, Were there any controls in place or any, you know, legal tools that you had at your disposal if an individual with a firearm had been spotted, again, within 300, 400 yards of the former president?
	I would defer to the Secret Service.
	I haven't seen their operations plan, sir.
	Right, but you as state police and then also the Butler local police who were responsible for areas outside of the perimeter?
	You know, if this individual had been spotted earlier with a firearm because it is an open carry state, what legal tools would you have had at your disposal?
	So we would have responded and attempted to make contact and ascertain what the person was doing there and what their activity was.
	Let me put this on pause here because this is important.
	They're actually highlighting not the failure but the setup of this situation in the first place.
	It's an open carry state, Pennsylvania.
	Okay. So if someone's carrying a firearm beyond the security perimeter, that's their constitutional right to do so.
	And so make the security perimeter absolutely uselessly not secure by being not broad enough and allowing a building at 150 yards with a clean line of sight on the president to be open so that anybody with an open carry could then get onto that building, not within the security perimeter, and carry out the shot.
	So they're not highlighting...
	The errors that were played here, they're highlighting what was the strategy to allow this to happen, to make it happen on purpose.
	Mehop. Okay.
	A lot of us have asked questions about lines of communication, and I think that's important, right?
	Because to the layperson at home, what we're trying to understand is if this individual was spotted on the roof, as he appears to have been, well over a minute before the shooting, did the local officers who spotted him Know how to radio into the command center?
	Was that information relayed?
	And then was it in turn relayed to the Secret Service?
	This question has been asked a few different times, but can you tell the public what you know about whether local officers outside the perimeter knew how to radio in a suspected threat, whether there was an individual in the command center who was receiving those calls and communicating them to the Secret Service?
	So I do know that Butler County set up a command post on the site itself, along with the Secret Services command post, but they were not located in the same building.
	The exact communication between municipal officers and that command post or the county dispatch that they would rely on.
	The state police have our own statewide dispatching.
	We can communicate with the dispatching centers telephonically and through electronic means.
	We maintain separate dispatching systems, so I would defer to...
	So the locals were not included in the Secret Service Command Center?
	The state police was or was not?
	The PSP, I can assure you the PSP was in there.
	Yeah. Additional people, I was briefed on one occasion that there was a representative from Butler ESU that was in there.
	When they were in there and the length is not really a focus at this point of our investigation into the homicide and the attempted...
	Two homicides as well as the officer-involved shooting.
	So that sequence of events has come up pursuant to us investigating that, but I am very remiss to give you a minute-by-minute timeline and what the communications were.
	Thank you.
	Gentlemen, I now recognize Mr. Pflueger for five minutes of questioning.
	He just highlighted the actual strategy.
	Open carry state, have the perimeter not be anywhere near the required security so that people can carry guns within 150 yards of the president.
	And then this nutcase crooks, who I have no doubt was groomed or on the radar of or known to one way or the other passively or actively by authorities, let him go do what he wants to do because they had seen his social media posts.
	Okay. Excellent.
	Let's hear what this guy has to say.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	My deepest sympathies to the family of Sheila Jackson Lee.
	We worked very closely together on many things.
	She was an excellent member of this committee.
	I agree with my colleague, Mr. Carter, when he talked about Americans deserve the truth.
	I absolutely agree with that.
	And also, Mr. Magaziner, talking about Republicans and Democrats working together on the oversight.
	Imagine if we worked together the transparency that we could have on some of the other issues that are going on right now.
	And I believe that that is possible for us to do.
	Thank you both for being here.
	Colonel Paris, was it clear to you when we talk about rules of engagement, deconfliction plans, the assignments of which law enforcement agency will cover which section?
	Did you have concerns prior to the president coming on stage?
	And if so, did you voice those concerns to the Secret Service?
	So just to be clear, I was not present at the venue on July 13th.
	But in the planning, my default position would be that our commanders are aware of what their responsibilities are within a unified command structure reporting to the Secret Service.
	And do you believe that it was absolutely clear that there were zero questions of who was supposed to cover what areas of the venue?
	I can only comment to our responsibilities, and I believe our responsibilities were delineated to us, Metter exceeded those responsibilities based on everything that I know as I sit here 10 days in.
	I think there's still a lot of questions regarding the plan, you know.
	Agreed. And this is always, in any sort of protection assignment, that's always the hardest thing.
	Who are friendly assets?
	Who could be a vulnerable, hostile actor?
	Who displays hostile intent, hostile act?
	I think it's clear there was a failure, and we definitely want to get to the bottom of it.
	President Yost, do you...
	Do you get the impression that Secret Service, at any point in the run-up to this or other events, has been stretched thin when it comes to just the work hours that they are putting in, the resources that they have?
	Was that communicated in any way?
	Well, I can't speak directly to that.
	I can tell you that law enforcement across this country is stretched thin.
	Just simply due to the inability to be able to attract the best and brightest at any levels in order to maintain the staffing levels we need.
	So if that is the case and we're not meeting those levels in Secret Service because of our inability to be able to recruit, then we need to address that.
	Or if it's the alignment of assets and the assignment of individuals, then that in itself is something as well and something I'm not in a position to be able to speak about.
	Other than to recognize that there are two huge factors here that need to be addressed.
	Well, it's clear that that's the case.
	And God bless both of you for what you do, for the hours that you put in to protect our communities.
	And we can't do it without you, and we need you, and we will continue to advocate for you.
	I want to talk about now that leads me into this next question.
	There's a piece of legislation, HR 8081, called the Disgraced Act.
	It says, denying infinite security and government resources allocated to the convicted and extremely disarmament.
	Who proposed that bill?
	Benny Johnson?
	This is a whole mouthful of basically taking details away from people that could include those who are convicted.
	Talk to me about the impact if former President Trump didn't have a protective detail of U.S. Secret Service.
	Talk to me about the impact on state and local partners to protect them in any of the communities that you represent.
	And by the way, he also was responsible for taking out al-Baghdadi, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and Qasem Soleimani, and the Iranian government wants to do harm to him and other people like him.
	So what's the impact if you don't have Secret Service help?
	Pause it right there for a second, people.
	Just remember who proposed that bill.
	It was none other than one of the people who asked questions today, Benny Thompson.
	In charge of the January 6th committee, Benny Thompson is the one who proposed or tabled, from what I understand, the Disgrace Act, which sought to strip federal employees of Secret Service protection if they were convicted of a crime.
	That's the guy right now lamenting the attempt on Donald Trump's life.
	Hypocrites. Scoundrels and demons.
	Sorry, I think...
	You know, we're trying not to become very political in this.
	I think we have a president of the United States who has, by simple virtue of his position, having served as president, that deserves a certain protection because of his service to the country.
	So the rest of these things are all things that are not for me to decide other than to tell you that I think we have a responsibility to our leaders.
	This is not political.
	That's not political.
	He deserves protection.
	You're absolutely right.
	I agree.
	Colonel Parris, I would just echo that.
	My understanding is it's a federal statute that creates the Secret Service and tasks them with those responsibilities.
	So to contemplate a different paradigm, I would reflect back to the legislature to contemplate something.
	If he was denied a protective detail in Pennsylvania this past week, the weekend prior, what would that have done to your local resource to protect him adequately?
	I think the removal of any resource inherently makes the burden on the surrounding resources that would have been committed somewhat.
	Additional. Thank you.
	Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
	Gentleman yields.
	Point of order?
	Point of order.
	Who's talking?
	Gentleman's recognized.
	So, I appreciate the gentleman's question, but let me put it another way to the witnesses.
	The reference legislature.
	Mr. Franky, remember, I mean, a question to the witness would be someone yielding to you.
	Point of order, I'm allowed.
	Benny's a little self-conscious here.
	A little defensive.
	If you read the bill, it says that if you are a convicted felon and found and sentenced by a judge, then you would not be...
	That's my point of order.
	Go ahead.
	Go ahead.
	Explain it, Benny.
	Have service.
	You have to be a convicted felon.
	And sentenced.
	And sentenced.
	Trump was only convicted, not sentenced.
	At the time the bill was filed, nobody who was a protectee was a convicted felon.
	Oh, yeah.
	Just coincidence.
	But if those who are lawyers here know that once you are a convicted felon and sentenced, you are remanded the custody of that particular law enforcement agency.
	I think it's an anomaly to try to say that the Secret Service would have to protect a felon in jail.
	A convicted felon.
	So, this whole notion about...
	He's very, very defensive.
	I just say to the gentleman, if you read it, it says you have to be a convicted felon and sentenced.
	Now, we're not there.
	The conjecture, you can do whatever you want.
	You tried to kill him, Benny.
	Let me be clear.
	You're a disgusting hypocrite who condemns violence and wishes death on your opponents.
	The publicists have made a lot of hate about the bill, saying it's about former President Trump.
	Oh, it's not.
	It's just a coincidence.
	And would take away his security.
	No, it wouldn't, because he wasn't convicted.
	That just is not true.
	Oh, of course not.
	The bill doesn't mention former Trump, President Trump, and it would not have affected security at this tragic event.
	The bill didn't mention Donald Trump?
	Does this dumbass not know what a bill of attainder is?
	Oh, the bill didn't mention Donald Trump, so it didn't target him.
	It's illegal to pass a law targeting an individual.
	So you do it the way you did it, Benny, you scoundrel, lying hypocrite.
	Oh, it didn't mention Donald Trump, because if we mentioned Donald Trump, it would have been unlawful on his face.
	We didn't mention him, and he hadn't been sentenced yet.
	The bill talks about any Secret Service protective.
	Oh, what does it do?
	Oh, that's why it was designed.
	Police agents aren't forced to become correctional officers too.
	That's the legislation.
	Oh, that's all it was?
	That's all it says.
	For the record.
	For the record.
	You're a liar, for the record.
	The gentleman don't need to get to his point of order.
	You're a liar, baby.
	Point of order is...
	You tried to have your political appointments killed.
	...
	inconsistent with the legislation.
	And it does not say...
	Me thinks he doth protesteth too much.
	...
	on President Trump would have been without secret service protection.
	He would have just been in jail without secret service protection.
	If he's not sentenced, he will still have the protection.
	Plain and simple.
	Five minutes of clarification.
	Plain and simple.
	Are you done, Benny?
	Are you done?
	I want to make a point of order then as well.
	A lot of times we hear from both sides of the aisle about rhetoric.
	Look at Benny's face right now.
	He has been caught trying to legislatively assassinate President Donald Trump.
	They passed that legislation before this incident occurred, and then Donald Trump survives by the grace of God an assassination attempt, and then this dipshit has to answer for the legislation that he was trying to pass to strip a convicted and sentenced felon of Secret Service protection if they're a federal employee.
	He knows damn well what he was trying to do.
	It was the dog whistle.
	That was intended to provoke this type of action from nutcases like crooks.
	And now that it's happened, but he survived, this scoundrel, sitting here like a sheepish-looking dog who just got caught taking a dump in the living room, has to pretend that that's not what we wanted to do.
	I wasn't trying to expose the federal employee, it wasn't Trump, to any danger.
	I was trying to facilitate transfer to correctional facilities so that Secret Service don't become guards in prison.
	Holy hell, Benny Thomas.
	Is it Thomas or Thompson?
	Benny Thompson.
	You're caught trying to legislatively assassinate your political rivals.
	Scoundrel of the highest order, clip it.
	And how rhetoric and the things we do in messaging bills that we do shapes discussion, impacts people.
	And first, my point of order is prison isn't necessarily a...
	A safer place.
	You can ask Mr. Epstein's family about that.
	And so to suggest that somehow you'd have the security necessary in a prison, I think, is just not an accurate statement.
	In terms of, you know, I agree with the ranking member that his bill did say that it would not apply in this particular case.
	You know, it's more about what we're doing and what we're saying at certain times that generates the attitude in our society.
	And so I just make that point of order about this particular legislation.
	I made in my opening remarks a request that he withdraw the bill.
	I just want to just make a look up.
	I think the chairman was clear that this bill was filed well in advance.
	So to connect, you mentioned timing.
	That's the point, you dumbass.
	We don't want to debate the bill.
	It was filed in advance.
	Are you going to file it after?
	I'm going to go ahead and end this now and we're going to move on.
	It was filed in advance of the assassination attempt?
	No shit, Sherlock.
	What are you going to do?
	File it now?
	After he survives an assassination attempt?
	Try to put forward the Disgrace Act to strip convicted felon federal employees of Secret Service?
	Oh yeah, see how well that goes after an assassination attempt.
	Of course it comes before the assassination attempt.
	And of course, it might not have changed anything for this event.
	It's the political permission slip being given to psychopaths like crooks who are then allowed to have access to an unsecured perimeter with a firearm in an open carry state to do what they wanted to do.
	Oh, no, no.
	It was filed before the assassination attempt.
	You guys are idiots.
	Mr. Ivey is up for five minutes.
	Holy cow!
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	And I want to associate myself with the remarks of our members here with respect to the loss of Ms. Jackson Lee.
	It's with deep sadness that I feel her loss.
	I share not only this committee with her, but on the Judiciary Committee as well.
	And she was insightful and inspirational.
	The way she handled herself and her role here in Congress.
	I also want to join with the comments about sympathies to the Comparator family and individuals who were injured on the day of the shooting.
	And I want to thank the chair for taking us up to Butler yesterday.
	My only regret about it was that it was too quick.
	And I think that, and I didn't know it was going to be like that, frankly, until after we got there and had a chance to talk to people in the community.
	But when we got there, they were very anxious to talk to us.
	In particular, I had conversations with Angela Flieger, supervisor for, and I hope I don't butcher this too bad, Connequenessing Township, who was extremely helpful, and Sam Zerzolo, who was a commissioner from Butler Township.
	And they were able to provide information on several fronts that I think we need to pay attention to, not just for this particular event, but going forward.
	Could you hit a video for me there?
	I think Ms. Flieger tried to produce this and sent it to me.
	The red building is the one that was directly behind the stage.
	The building in the center there was where the shooter was.
	The reason I'm asking for this to be shown...
	As you get past the middle of it, look to the opposite side of the field from where the shots came.
	Oh, you can stop it now.
	And useless video.
	I counted about 12 rooftops there, just sort of standing at the front.
	I'm a former federal prosecutor.
	I don't have a background in protection.
	But my thought was, why would we pick a spot where you had that many rooftops that were available?
	And my colleague, Mr. Crane, I don't know.
	Good question.
	Definitely defer to your experience as a sniper in the military.
	Who made that decision?
	Your point about picking the water tower as a higher point would have been a good one, I think, to consider.
	And I'm curious about finding out what the Secret Service would say about that.
	But I just thought that this was a bad site to pick, no matter where you put them.
	There was just too many openings.
	The field was totally open.
	And one of the things that Ms.
	Flieger pointed out was that the road that went To the side of this spot here, the stage was right in front of those two buildings.
	The snipers were on top of those, I believe.
	They didn't shut down that road.
	And she also showed me a photo of her husband going in on that day through a fence that wasn't guarded in the perimeter area.
	Another point that she made was that the night before the speech was done, She and 50 or 60 other people from the community came to decorate the stage and put up the red, white, and blue blending and the Trump signs and everything.
	But the point she had there was that none of those people were vetted before they went into the area and were up at the stage and could have done anything, I think, was the point that she made.
	And also noted that apparently the shooter had hidden the gun somewhere on the site by, I think, where the I hate to call the name of the business, but the business where the shooter ended up taking the shots from.
	So I think there's a variety of concerns here that I look forward to getting a chance to hear from these individuals.
	Who chose the venue if the penalty was changed?
	I don't know if it's going to be in the context of this committee or the oversight committee or the task force that's been proposed.
	Whoever does it needs to go talk to these folks because the ones that I talked with had not been interviewed by the FBI, Secret Service, or local police.
	And they have key information that I think we should have, especially in making decisions about going forward.
	And then just a couple quick points before my time runs out.
	I think it came up with respect to the communications piece.
	I appreciate Mr. Yoy's comments there, but we need to figure out not just what happened on that day, but when we do these at other sites across the country going forward, what's going to happen with the communications?
	And if they're not using the national bandwidth that was set up, How can we make sure that that happens in the future?
	And then with respect to the local police not reinventing the wheel every time, one of them suggested maybe some kind of clearinghouse or information where local police departments, local elected officials, who, for example, in this instance, didn't find out the president was coming until a few days before.
	And therefore, I had to scramble to catch up.
	I believe she called your office, Congressman Kelly, to figure out what was going on, and you hadn't even been told about it yet.
	So we need to get to a point where we've got better communication, that we're giving elected officials and law enforcement at the local and state level more lead time and more information so they can prepare for these events.
	And I know that the director has resigned, but I think it's critical to make sure that we go forward with the investigation of the Secret Service.
	Whether she's there or not.
	And then the last point, I apologize for running over, is that to the Secret Service and to Homeland Security, I know there's going to be a process now to replace her, but that cannot get in the way of us sorting out what happened on that day and, more importantly, what we need to take forward because we've got other events coming up in the very near future.
	We've got to make sure we take those lessons quickly.
	And so we can move them forward.
	I thank the chair for his deference.
	Give me a little time to run over there.
	And I thank you again for taking us up to Butler.
	You were making an excellent point, and I didn't want to stop you, Mr. Ivey.
	I now recognize Mr. Garbarino, the gentleman from New York, for five minutes.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, Chairman.
	Colonel Paris, there have been conflicting reports about the location.
	Of state and local law enforcement.
	Secret Service Director, I believe, said that, former Secret Service Director, said that local police were in the same building that the gunman fired from, while other accounts indicate that local law enforcement was in an adjacent building.
	Were any Pennsylvania state troopers, state police assigned to the building when the shooting happened?
	There were no state troopers, to my knowledge, assigned there, sir.
	Do you know if any other local law enforcement were assigned inside that building?
	I only know that...
	Butler ESU were assigned.
	When you say that building, I'm referring to a, there's a series of buildings there that have covered walkways or second-story walkways that allow you to, almost like a pole barn-type configuration, a modular-type building.
	But to my knowledge, there were no troopers assigned to that location, sir.
	Thank you.
	As technology has evolved, drones...
	I've become widely available to both law enforcement and the general public.
	I got one.
	For a large event with this level of security, would you normally expect law enforcement to use drones for surveillance and deploy counter-drone technology?
	I'm sorry, I couldn't hear the last part.
	Would you normally expect law enforcement to use drones for surveillance and deploy counter-drone technology?
	Obviously, as I mentioned earlier, my experience at this location is there are a number of elevated locations.
	It should have been secured.
	There are a lot of ways to secure that.
	They could be with individuals assigned to it, but certainly in Overwatch, to be able to get a good visual of those locations is paramount.
	So it's been reported that the Secret Service apparently did not use drones for surveillance, but the shooter was able to fly his own drone over the area earlier on the day of the rally and get aerial footage of the site.
	Do you know if that's true?
	I have no direct knowledge.
	Did Secret Service have dogs?
	And do you know whether or not local state Secret Service enforcement was aware of any drone use?
	I've heard the news reports, but I have no direct knowledge.
	Would you consider this a major security breach?
	Absolutely. Now, it's also been reported, Colonel Parris, that the local law enforcement spotted the shooter outside the AGR building and on its roof minutes prior to the shooting.
	Did local police alert?
	The Secret Service that the gunman was on or around the AGR building roof, you know?
	So this goes to my earlier qualifier about the timeline, but my understanding of the sequence of events is that he was determined to be suspicious as a result of behavior that he was exhibiting, milling around that area in front of the AGR building.
	Ten days later, they don't have a proper timeline.
	There was a text thread that was going, I've been briefed, between the ESU members.
	They identified, they took a photo of him.
	At some point when he utilized the rangefinder, the suspicion was heightened.
	So I know at a certain point in the command post, a member of PSP received a phone call and a text message from members of ESU.
	And I know from an interview that that was immediately relayed in the command post to the Secret Service.
	And what happened?
	That was my next question.
	So what happened?
	What actions were taken after it was related to Secret Service?
	So when the PSP member received that information and verbally turned right around, gave it to the Secret Service, our member was provided with a number to which the picture that had been taken by the Butler ESU members that was on that group thread, to which that should be sent.
	Our member did that, and our understanding was that was some element of the Secret Service.
	So you, this was all reported?
	Yeah, this was all reported to Secret Service and they gave him Secret Service and sent him back, one of your officers, a number back to send the information back to?
	Is that what you just said?
	That's my understanding.
	When did that happen?
	Again, the actual timeline, I'm very remiss because I know these timelines need to be hammered out exactly to the minute, but I would say that the overall timeline is a...
	About an hour before is when he became suspicious to ESU.
	What I want to say is, if we know that former President Trump was shot at 18, 11 hours, it was probably in the vicinity of 25 to 30 minutes, but I want to make sure that's a very...
	So it was before he was on, before he went off to speak?
	But at that point, just to be clear, he was determined to be suspicious.
	There was no information that he...
	He possessed a weapon.
	He was outside of that building where the ESU was posted.
	They were being vigilant.
	It's, I think, relevant that there were other people at the venue who were suspicious and reported, likewise, in a close temporal nexus to that as well.
	But just to confirm, the Secret Service had this information that there was a suspicious individual.
	He had used a rangefinder, which made him even more suspicious.
	And this was all reported to them.
	Prior to President Trump being allowed on the stage to speak?
	Yes. I believe, again, I'll defer to when the president came out.
	I know that that was probably 20 to 25 minutes before 18-11 hours.
	And steps were taken by the municipal officers over in that area.
	They were actively looking for crooks.
	You saw the building yesterday.
	That's a pretty wide footprint.
	They began looking for him.
	there were scores of people making their way across that facility.
	Again, just for some context, there were over 100 people that day that necessitated or were requiring medical attention due to the heat.
	There was a missing six year old.
	This individual was deemed to be suspicious because he was walking around and not moving into the venue.
	The rangefinder obviously heightened that and they were attempting to locate him as people were moving across that space or attending the event to the secure The gentleman needs to wrap it up.
	Perhaps somebody else will yield to you or me on this topic.
	Or we'll just pick up the questioning here.
	That sounds great, prosecutor.
	First, I do want to mention how sad it is to see...
	Sheila Jackson Lee's empty seat there.
	What an incredible inspiration to so many of us and a great member and advocate community presence and we really are sorry to miss her.
	She would be very eager to be asking questions here today because there are a lot of unanswered questions and I sat through Four and a half hour hearing yesterday with the director of the Secret Service.
	And we got no information.
	So I'm going to jump on, piggyback off of Mr. Garbarino.
	Where you left off is that you relayed or PSP relayed the photograph to the number that the Secret Service directed.
	Your officer, too.
	Is that right?
	Yes, sir.
	Now, did anything come back?
	Any instructions or directions come back from the Secret Service?
	So, again, that is left to the after action.
	We're trying to come up with a sequence of events that led to Crooks on top of the building where he ultimately took the shots.
	Right, but you said...
	I'm trying to find...
	I don't need this specific timeline.
	I'm trying to just figure out the sequence because...
	You said that many of your officers or Butler ESU officers were looking for Crooks.
	That was after that photograph was relayed to the Secret Service?
	My understanding was after the photo was relayed to the R Trooper in the command post.
	And yes, Crooks was in that area around the building.
	My understanding is two additional municipal officers who were on a different post responded to that area and they began actively looking for crooks.
	They circumvented or they circumscribed the building to try and locate him.
	It became apparent at some point that he was up on the roof.
	Those two municipal officers who responded then to their credit actively once they realized that he was on the roof, one boosted the other one up.
	Hanging from the ledge of the roof by the time that officer was boosted up on top of the roof.
	He had the AR out and he pointed it at the municipal officer who suspended from the roof, was not in a position, feet dangling at that point to draw a weapon or continue hoisting himself back up on the roof.
	He drops back down from the roof.
	And at this point, I believe that's when the video that's been widely circulated with people filming.
	Crooks up on the roof.
	There's somebody up on the roof.
	There were other law enforcement around the building running, but their vantage point on the ground did not lend a clear line of sight to where Crooks was at the top of that building.
	One of our troopers on roving patrol also was notified.
	That word went out and he responded about the time that the municipal officer was boosting.
	The other officer up onto the roof.
	What was he notified of?
	I don't know specifically.
	That's going to be part of the after action.
	But we obviously knew that Crooks was suspicious.
	He had not gone into the venue and they were actively doing everything they could to try and locate him.
	So the local officers who were outside of the perimeter in charge of securing the outside perimeter area, one way or another I don't want to be clear about...
	I don't want to speak for the...
	I haven't seen the Secret Service operations plan.
	What their responsibilities were and what their understanding of those were from the Secret Service.
	I don't want to comment on it.
	But somehow they got the message.
	Somehow there was information that he was suspicious by the time that that municipal officer was hoisted up onto the roof.
	Do you know how long it was between the time that the photograph was relayed to the Secret Service and the time when the officer was trying to hoist himself onto the roof?
	So that's a critical, detailed, salient question.
	I would answer it from the reverse time period from if the first shots rang out at 1811 hours.
	The hoisting up of the officer occurred probably no more.
	Again, I'm going to give you a time, but I want to just put it in the context of a sequence of events.
	I would say at most two and a half to three minutes before that first shot.
	When they were notified in the interim, it still remains unnervous.
	And when he fell off of the...
	he let go?
	The municipal officer, when the...
	Briefing that I had was the municipal officer saw Crooks.
	Crooks saw him and Crooks turned and leveled the gun at him in a position tactically of extreme disadvantage, suspended in the air with your legs dangling after somebody had boosted you up.
	Right. And he let go, right?
	He let go and he fell back down.
	And was there at that point any communications that there's a shooter on the roof from the municipal officers who were there?
	That's all part of the after action.
	We're just trying to get a sequence of events up to the point when Crooks then fired the weapon.
	So that's been the focus of our investigation.
	How long?
	How many seconds?
	There was at least, you said you thought two and a half to three minutes between the time when the officer, the municipal officers, tried to hoist on top of the roof.
	Crooks pointed the gun at them.
	They dropped.
	And then between that time and when he fired the shots.
	I don't want to give you an exact period of time, but it was minutes.
	It was a very short period of time.
	Very short minutes?
	But not seconds.
	I would say minutes.
	But I would be remiss if I gave you, and I want to be very clear on the record.
	When you do an investigation like this, the timeline is critical.
	You're asking me?
	I'm answering to the best of my ability right now.
	And I know my time is up.
	Colonel Paris, I want to thank you for providing us with this information.
	It was incredibly disappointing that the director of the Secret Service did not provide any of this information yesterday.
	Goldman's got to know who to go after for the failed attempt.
	We're going to have somebody new at the top, but...
	Just having somebody new does not answer the questions.
	And so, Mr. Chairman, I know you are working diligently to try to get witnesses here.
	This is not an academic exercise.
	This is not something that the American people can wait 60 days for.
	With these gaps in information, there are conspiracy theories, there is disinformation, and all of our...
	Safety is at risk.
	Political violence is escalated.
	And we need to know these answers.
	I thank you for bringing these witnesses here.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And I appreciate the tag team between two sides to get to the details on this, because this is poignant.
	Very poignant.
	I now recognize Ms. Green for five minutes.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Colonel Parris, I'd like to carry the dialogue on about this specific timeline.
	I have a timeline that was given to us on the Oversight Committee yesterday when we questioned former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheadle as she has resigned today.
	But the timeline that I'd like to talk to you about is exactly what you were just discussing here.
	It was at 545 that the Butler County Emergency Services noticed Thomas Crooks on the roof, took a picture and reported it.
	You stated just a few minutes before in your testimony that police or PSP were given a phone number to the Secret Service and that Butler County Emergency Services Texted or sent the picture?
	Was that a text?
	Was that a digital platform?
	Was it an email?
	How did they send the picture?
	So just to be clear, at that period of time, at 1845, I don't believe the testimony was...
	5.45 p.m.
	1745. 5.45 p.m.
	Yes, ma'am.
	He was not up on the roof at that point.
	No, no.
	Emergency services.
	Notice Thomas Crooks on the roof.
	This is a timeline that we have.
	Took a picture and reported it.
	Who did they send that picture to?
	Just to be clear, they were posted in the AGR building and took a picture of him.
	That's what you're...
	Yes, who did they send the picture to?
	So I only know from interviews what I can confirm to my knowledge and belief here today that a member of Pennsylvania State Police inside of the command post received that information telephonically and by text, related to the Secret Service, and then was given a number to follow up on.
	And that was based, again, heightened suspicion.
	How did they relay it to Secret Service?
	I believe that they verbally turned and said in the command post, this is information that I just received.
	And then in follow-up to that, as directed from the interview that I was briefed on, that was forwarded by text as requested by the Secret Service.
	Can you give us copies of that communication and that phone number that was given to them was for Secret Service?
	So that's part of the ongoing investigation, and I would defer to the legality of...
	Can you find that information and provide it to our committee?
	We'll look to see if legally I will consult chief counsel within the state police, but it is an ongoing criminal investigation at this point.
	So after it was reported, President Trump took the stage at 6.03 p.m.
	All of this took place, this was 18 minutes before President Trump actually took the stage at 6.03 p.m.
	President Trump was shot in the face at 6.11 p.m.
	This has all been reported, these timelines.
	The timeline is going to be critical for the after-action report.
	Obviously, we're conducting an investigation with the FBI.
	We have been deferential to the FBI in terms of what has been released.
	To the media, I was present for one press briefing on the night of Saturday night, July 13th, and we've been deferential to the FBI on that, so I would refer you to the FBI.
	The timelines that you're quoting, I just want to be clear on the record, to my knowledge and belief, I don't have a minute-by-minute timeline.
	I've had multiple briefings about what these interviews have gleaned, but they're from the perspective of PSP investigating.
	The homicide and the two attempted homicides.
	Thank you, Colonel.
	During the event, at what point in the day was someone from your team first made aware that there was a potential suspicious person or possible threat?
	So based on my knowledge and belief, that information relayed to the command post from Butler ESU in terms of crooks was the first time that I'm aware of.
	Again, keeping in mind, I've heard estimates that there were 13,000 people there.
	There were multiple people identified as suspicious.
	Several that were identified in that area.
	Yes, thank you.
	Now, you stated before in your questions that you haven't seen an operation plan, but didn't your team participate, and why haven't you seen the plan?
	So, as my answer prior on the record, I've asked for it.
	The state police has asked for it.
	We have yet to receive it.
	And my understanding is that our walkthrough with our commanders and our area commander was to delineate what our responsibilities were, and we endeavored.
	To fulfill those responsibilities.
	Who was the Secret Service agent in charge of the advance team?
	I don't know the name of the agent.
	How was PSP supposed to communicate with Secret Service on the advance team?
	In the planning leading up to it?
	So my understanding is, as is typical, we're notified.
	We were notified by email on July 5th.
	The meeting on July 8th, Monday, was to get all of those partners together to exchange information, how they could communicate with one another, and then the planning took place from there.
	Could you provide our committee a copy of all those communications, Colonel Pierce?
	Subject to whatever investigation.
	I will check with our legal counsel.
	Pennsylvania has multiple state statutes that cover investigative plans.
	Or law enforcement sensitive information.
	Thank you very much.
	And Mr. Chairman, one more thing, if I may.
	Trump's Secret Service protection could be removed under Benny Thompson's proposed legislation.
	This legislation was introduced while the politically weaponized government was prosecuting former President Donald Trump.
	This would leave him at risk.
	I'd also like to state for the record for this committee that over 140 inmates are murdered in prison.
	Every single year.
	This is a dangerous place.
	Prison is.
	And, of course, an 8% of violence in prison leads to murder of inmates.
	This legislation is reckless.
	And the minority ranking member needs to withdraw this legislation that would lead to the murder of President Trump.
	Legislative assassination.
	The Epstein bill.
	Well, we're not going to debate.
	You think that statement should be made when the ranking member is here so he can...
	At least address it?
	No. Thank you.
	He made his point earlier about his bill.
	There's a difference of opinion, I suppose.
	We're just...
	Yeah, it didn't mention Trump.
	Y'all are out.
	And they passed it before.
	I now recognize Mr. Lalota for five minutes of question.
	Thank you, Chairman.
	Ten days ago...
	Thank you, Mr. Goldman.
	Ten days ago, a 20-year-old with no military or law enforcement training, with no more than about $1,000 worth of equipment, and apparently working alone, thwarted the United States Secret Service.
	An agency with a $3 billion budget and about 8,000 personnel.
	In the early phases of this investigation, it is clear the Secret Service exhibited poor tactics, including substandard two-way communications with state and local PD.
	They displayed a lack of strategy, including not employing drones to surveil the risks to President Trump and the crowd.
	And since July 13th, the Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service, evidenced by them not being here today, has avoided accountability by, among other things, avoiding hearings like this.
	The attempted assassination of former President Trump, the leading candidate for president in 2024, shocked the conscience of nearly every American, regardless of party affiliation.
	We, the members of the Homeland Security Committee from both sides of the aisle, are here today to ask questions about those who were in charge that day to hold the Secret Service accountable, but more importantly, to ensure this never happens again.
	Chairman, thank you for hosting this hearing.
	Colonel Parris, you're the commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police Department?
	Yes, sir, I am.
	And your testimony, sir, is that approximately 25 minutes, I won't hold you to the exacts, but approximately 25 minutes before the first shots were fired, that local law enforcement officers identified Crooks as suspicious?
	As suspicious, yes, sir.
	And what was it that led those officers to conclude that Crooks was suspicious?
	My understanding was that he was milling about and he stood out to them because he never made his way to a point of ingress to the venue.
	In defense of possible hypotheses, could have been waiting for somebody, could have been delayed, but he stood out to them and they, from their vantage point at the AGR building, identified him as suspicious.
	That was 62 minutes per hour, as I understand the timeline.
	That first one, it was 25 minutes prior for the rangefinder.
	Thank you, Chairman.
	And Commissioner, with respect to him being suspicious, were there other folks who were also in the crowd identified as suspicious by law enforcement?
	I have been briefed that, yes, there were multiple individuals which would be consistent with normal operations for a detail like this that are identified as suspicious.
	Can we take that as a single-digit number of other folks?
	The number that I was briefed on was single digit, but I can't say definitively that I was...
	What number were you briefed on, Colonel?
	Excuse me?
	What number were you briefed on?
	I believe I was briefed on an additional three individuals.
	Okay, so Crooks plus three.
	My understanding is you had about 30 Pennsylvania State Police officers at the time of the rally.
	That were assigned to the detail, both responsibilities of the detail.
	Yes, sir.
	And were all of them assigned to your area of the perimeter, not the interior where the Secret Service held the most jurisdiction?
	I'm confused by your question, sir.
	My understanding, and what the committee has been told, is there were two layers of defense of President Trump.
	One, the interior, which the Secret Service held the most domain over.
	And two, the exterior perimeter, which had seated a lot of authorities to state and local.
	Is that your understanding as well, Cardinal?
	So I don't want to get convoluted with different perimeters.
	I'm familiar that there was a VIP seating area up front.
	When I refer to the secure perimeter, I'm talking about the fencing that goes around the Butler County Farm Show.
	All of our people were detailed at various locations, decided by the Secret Service.
	Inside of that.
	Thanks. That leads me to the next question.
	If staff can queue up the Eli Crane video to about second number one or two?
	This is the AGR building.
	I and several of my colleagues were there yesterday in Butler.
	Kudos to Mr. Crane for getting this good video.
	My understanding from your prior testimony is there were two officers stationed or assigned, I think was your testimony, to this building?
	I'm aware of two, but I don't want to say, again, not having seen this.
	And they were assigned, sir?
	My understanding is that the Secret Service and Butler ESU had some sort of collaboration, and that was to be covered.
	What was their assignment in the building, sir?
	I cannot comment.
	I'd be remiss.
	Were they assigned to be in the building?
	I can't comment.
	What were the qualifications of the people assigned to or around the building?
	ESU guys, SWAT guys, long guns, good tactics?
	They would be, as the name implies, but I defer to their exact training.
	I'm not aware of it specifically.
	But your understanding is, through the duration of the incident, to at least the first shots fired, they were entirely within the building, not on the building, sir?
	I don't 100% want to say where they are, where they were.
	Ten days out, they don't know these things.
	But you don't have an understanding as to whether they were assigned to be in the building or on top of it?
	I don't.
	I would need to see the Secret Service operations plan.
	And would that have been left to the discretion of state and local, or would that have been left to the discretion of the Secret Service?
	It sounds like you're saying that would have been left to the discretion of the Secret Service.
	I would say it's the Secret Service as the lead agency, just like they told us.
	Here's the post we want you to staff.
	This is the motorcade we want.
	I would defer to the Secret Service.
	Thanks, Colonel.
	When in Butler yesterday, we asked the question, why weren't the two well-qualified ESU officers on top of the building rather than in it?
	And what would you say if we were told the explanation is, well, it was a hot day in Butler, and there was air conditioning inside the building and not on the building?
	What would be your reaction to that assertion, Colonel?
	I can't respond to it.
	I have no firsthand knowledge about it.
	Was it a hot day in Butler that day?
	I believe it was a warm day, yes, sir.
	But you have no knowledge of whether or not the Secret Service or anybody else assigned these two officers to be in the building and not on it?
	No, sir.
	I yield, Mr. Chairman.
	Gentlemen, we're going to go out of order because Mr. Littrell has to get to his committee, so you're recognized for five minutes.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Can you pull the video back up, please?
	Just for clarification, that is the exact point where the shooter was positioned, correct?
	Looking through that window in proximity, if you give a range fan, if you were to expose yourself outside that window, is that the shooter's position?
	No? In relation to that video, where is the shooter's position at?
	Just further on the left side.
	And, Mr. Parris, can you clarify something?
	There were ESU agents internal to the building or in proximity to the building in that location, correct?
	I don't know to that specific location, but they were assigned to the AGR building.
	And once the call went out that you had a bad actor in, the agents in the building left their position to try to find that individual?
	My understanding is he was on the ground moving around the perimeter, and they moved to actively aid in the search along with additional municipal officers.
	Does it make sense that ESU agents would be positioned inside the windows so they'd have a better vantage point out into where the X is, where the asset is located?
	Could you ask that question again?
	It makes sense to me that the ESU agents would be positioned in these windows, the windows that they're talking about in this building, so they could have better eyes on the asset, the president.
	Instead of internal building milling about.
	Is that a fair assessment?
	I'm remiss because I don't know what the conversation was and what the responsibility is to land.
	I think my concern is if we did have agents, let's just speak hypothetically here, if agents were positioned in these windows in order to provide cover, I'm sorry, protection for the asset, and then they were released.
	I'm assuming they work in pairs, correct?
	There's only two of them, or there's four of them in the building.
	From my briefings, there were two.
	There were two.
	To me, it would make sense that one would stay behind in order to cover the X, or cover the asset, and then one would engage in activity to find the actor that they were trying to identify, correct?
	I think my concern is we...
	Why did they leave it empty?
	And I hate to say this out loud, but if we didn't do due justice and we left that asset exposed because both ESU agents went to look for a bad actor, we just gave the shooter a bowling alley.
	Yep. I don't know what their responsibilities and their rules of engagement were not having seen the Secret Service operations plan.
	Reluctant to speculate at this point.
	I would rely on the reviews yet to come.
	When it comes to Secret Service and the local law enforcement, the state law enforcement, I understand that they are housed in the same...
	Is there a common communication channel?
	And if so, does each agent and each officer that's working the event have...
	I'm going to use old terminology.
	Do they have an avalanche call?
	Do they have a no joy?
	When they see something that raises the red flag, can any officer radio in, go, no, go.
	We are not, hold the asset in place.
	We have somebody that we're looking for.
	And if they do or if they don't, how many people does that have to go through to get to the right actor in order to say, stop?
	I don't know.
	Okay, we need to figure that out.
	Because if I'm an issue...
	They don't have walkie-talkies or cell phones.
	A person who has to radio somebody else to get to the...
	To the main person, then to call it, the dishes are done.
	I'm aware of three radio systems in operation.
	PSP's, the Secret Service, and Butler County's.
	All communicating on different channels.
	Technically, yes, but the integration occurs.
	I can only speak from PSP.
	Our integration occurs by us having somebody inside of the Secret Service command post.
	Again, for an incident of this magnitude, in theory, the more people you have on the same channel, if there was...
	Medical emergency or lost six-year-old and everybody keys up at once, it paralyzes your communication.
	I understand that, but if there's one specific channel that you can go to to call an avalanche and say, which is freeze the asset, I think that would be necessary.
	Now, you mentioned something earlier.
	You guys have done about 20 events this year in Pennsylvania, and you spoke.
	How many were screened by CNN?
	The military folks in this room are going to understand it's the first month of deployment and the last month of deployment are the most dangerous times to be in combat.
	One, because you get there the first month, you have no idea what's going on, and then you're there and you get common.
	You get complacent.
	And before you leave, that last month, situational awareness kind of dies down a little bit, and that's when bad things happen.
	There's absolutely nothing common in protecting a president.
	Ever. And as we move forward, I don't want that to be a term that we use.
	Because common just got our president, our former president, shot.
	And if these assets would have been on high alert.
	At all times.
	And I'm not saying that they weren't.
	But when things become common, we get complacent.
	Moving forward, my expectation would be that through the collaboration and the planning of these events, you want more people there.
	You want people voicing issues and everybody operating on the same page in a unified command.
	But I have instructed our commanders, the ops plans get reviewed prior to this up through our Deputy Commissioner of Operations, Lieutenant Colonel Pivens, seated here behind me today.
	But as a result of this, if there are any issues that our people see, So we are ordering them to flag them and we'll work collaboratively moving forward for the remainder of the season and moving forward.
	Thanks, sir.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Gentlemen, Yields.
	And our witnesses, at any point, we're going to probably go at least another hour here.
	If you need to take a break, just let me know.
	Give me the high sign or a thumbs up.
	Y'all are okay right now?
	Take a break.
	All right, we'll do five minutes and five minutes only.
	The restroom's right down the hallway.
	I got a P2, but...
	Adjourn. Are we back yet?
	Subcommittee and left to a mock.
	Okay, so let's wait.
	Let me actually take a pause for one second and thank our sponsor for today's show because they're a good one.
	We're on the precipice of a 1776 moment, and so it only makes sense that we should be drinking 1775 coffee.
	Are you a sleepy Joe who had to withdraw from the presidential election because you have zero cognitive performance and people are questioning whether or not you're even still alive?
	Scared to walk upstairs without worry you're going to fall down or up?
	Do you struggle to muster focus and brain power for the basic things in life such as eating ice cream or riding a bike?
	Are you Kamala Harris who thinks, oh my goodness, what, you think you fell out of a coconut tree?
	Are you Kamala Harris who feels unburdened by the past for what might be?
	You need to stop drinking woke liberal coffee and start your day by drinking Rumble's very own 1775 coffee.
	Never mind that it'll be the best tasting coffee you've ever had in your entire life, as in seriously good.
	It's also ethically sourced from a family farm in the high altitude mountains of Bolivia.
	So instead of waking up tomorrow morning, drinking your mold infested big corporation, woke ideology coffee that's probably making you sick from all the pesticides they spray on it.
	Try and fall in love with Rumble's very own 1775 Coffee.
	Support freedom of speech and build a parallel economy that actually values you.
	Go to 1775coffee.com.
	Right now, pick up your first bag.
	Use my promo code VIVA.
	You'll get 10% off your first order, so make it a big one.
	My favorite is medium.
	They got medium, dark, and peaberry.
	No, my favorite is dark.
	I don't want medium.
	Peaberry is like a nice Kona type coffee.
	It's good, but dark.
	Powerful, strong, like me.
	You won't regret it for a moment.
	Level up your morning routine with a bag of 1775 coffee and sleep well at night knowing that your hard-earned dollars are going towards supporting a freedom-loving company that respects freedom-loving creators and has partnered up with a freedom-loving platform, Rumble.
	Forward slash Viva, or promo code Viva, 10% off your first bag.
	Link is in the description, and I'd like to thank our sponsor very much for supporting free speech, supporting creators, and making a wickedly good coffee.
	Bada bing, bada boom, we're back now.
	Let's see what's going on.
	And we're caught up a little bit?
	No? Congresswoman Jackson Lee was a long-time member of this committee who always fought passionately for her constituents.
	Everybody wants their dead.
	I would like to yield to the ranking member for his remarks that he'd like to make.
	Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
	And like all of us, we are deeply saddened by the loss of my colleague, who was my seatmate for quite a while, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.
	Needless to say, she will be missed.
	So, I'd like to, at this point, take a moment to honor the legacy of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, who, as I said, passed away last week.
	During her nearly 20 years on this committee, she served Can I skip this, everybody?
	As every single one of us in this room, there was no more fierce an advocate than Congresswoman Jackson Lee, and she directed her passion to making the homeland safer and more secure.
	She was dedicated to oversight, asking questions of government and private sector witnesses alike, and pressing for hard answers.
	She was a prolific legislator who took pride in writing her own legislation and improving the bills of her colleagues through amendments.
	Congresswoman Jackson Lee fought for resources, first responders, help for those suffering the effects of natural disasters, and immigration policies that reflect our values as a nation of immigrants.
	Congresswoman Jackson Lee's reputation across Capitol Hill was similarly impressive.
	Indeed, it often appeared she could be in more than one place at a time.
	Within one hour, the Congresswoman could be observed giving a floor speech, participating in a committed hearing on a topic she cared about, and then giving remarks to Trump on her deathbed to support her cause.
	She was a reluctant and relentless public servant, and every cause she took on was better because of it.
	The nation owes her a debt of gratitude.
	I'm grateful that Congresswoman Jackson Lee decided to lend her immeasurable energy and tenacity to our committee.
	Her absence will be felt just as much as her presence, and we will miss her dearly.
	Today, we continue our prayers for her family, friends, and constituents.
	I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
	Thank you, Ranking Member.
	I ask that all members of the committee please rise and join me in observing a moment of silence to honor Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee's memory.
	I now recognize the gentleman from New Jersey.
	Thank you, Chairman.
	Thank you, Chairman.
	This is for appearing here today.
	I just want to join my colleagues in remembering our colleague, Sheila Jackson Lee.
	She was incredible at this job.
	She was brilliant.
	She was tenacious.
	She was tough, but she cared about her district, cared about this country.
	My favorite thing was her taking the five-minute clock as a recommendation as opposed to a hard set time.
	But to the matter today, I just want to ask, Colonel Paris, how many times have you worked for the Secret Service on events like this in Pennsylvania?
	So year-to-date, we're in the low 20s.
	The purpose of this hearing is to examine the assassination attempt since former President Donald Trump took place in July 13.
	And I recognize myself for an opening statement.
	On July 13, 2024, our nation came with an inch of a mitigated tragedy and crisis.
	A standard process of procedures that followed every single time.
	In terms of the planning of the regime, and fires more more.
	At exactly the right moment, however, President Trump turned his head to read a chart so that there was a plan.
	Was there any change in aviation?
	Nice out.
	I've been here for so many of my colleagues in the committee who served in law enforcement.
	I want to ask you a question.
	From the time that a law enforcement officer was sent out, was identified by a shooter.
	He has survived by his wife and two daughters.
	Two others, 57-year-old David Dutch and 74-year-old James Copenhaver were seriously injured.
	I'd like to pause for a moment of silence.
	When I assigned that number, I don't want to go up into a timeline of three minutes before.
	That's probably a total number of time, the amount of time that he was on the roof.
	When that was local, when the one local officer hoisted the other one up and subsequently falls, releases himself after being faced with a shooter.
	He's already got failed at the time.
	And I'm told, again, sequence of events, not a timeline based on the criteria.
	I'm slowing it down, sorry.
	That's helpful when the chairman and I were conferring on that, because there's many failures on that day, but it would have been a critical failure if a gunman had turned his rifle on law enforcement and no one had pulled the president off the stage if it was a matter of minutes and seconds.
	Thank you for allowing me to clarify.
	Of course, and thank you for answering the question.
	Just going back to the general process that you've seen over your distinguished career, Were there any specific challenges that you and your team faced during this event?
	None of which I'm aware, to my knowledge.
	The planning on the PSP side, as per our interface with the Secret Service, was routine.
	Okay. And you mentioned earlier that in your experience, the standard protocol of Secret Service comes.
	Is there an opportunity for the state, county, and local partners to provide input?
	You know, given that they have more familiarity with the area, Butler Police, you yourself have more familiarity with the area.
	Is there an opportunity for you to provide any feedback to the plan that the Secret Service comes to you with?
	In my past experience, yes.
	And in my past experience, I've found the Secret Service very open and collaborative.
	We enjoy a very strong working relationship with them.
	And again, there's that fine line where the deference is that they're the top com under a unified command.
	It's their incident.
	But certainly we would endeavor to give them any local nuance that would make the planning more successful and more safe.
	I appreciate that.
	One of the things we touched on multiple times today is the multiple lines of communication, three different signals that were being used, a command center.
	In your experience working with the Secret Service, have you seen a better implementation of a more streamlined communication setup that allows the different actors, the local PD, the county PD, the state police, to directly communicate to the commander?
	I have not.
	The Secret Service comms is a very complex operation because of the worldwide environment in which they work.
	I'm in no way an expert in it.
	I think from the state and local perspective our job is to try and Integrate communications, and it doesn't have to be a super high-tech solution.
	We have people who can get a message, turn over their shoulder, and report verbally.
	We have radios that we can exchange, or we have a trooper with a radio assigned to another partner, be that a federal partner or a municipal partner, and those two radio communication systems can interface because of the human interaction.
	And I'll wrap up real quickly, Mr. Chair.
	And it sort of makes sense in a way because you're going to have people doing traffic.
	They're going to folks who you mentioned a child went missing.
	You could have A firecracker.
	You could have multiple number of things that don't need to rise up, which is why some level of siloing makes sense.
	But we need to look at how we make it a clearer chain of communication to ensure that really important pieces of information, like identifying the shooter on the roof, doesn't get delayed in moving through those channels.
	So thank you both for appearing here.
	Thank you both for your service.
	And thank you, Chair.
	I yield back.
	Gentlemen, I now recognize Congressman Ezell for his five minutes of testimony.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	We also want to thank all of you for being here today and for Speaker Johnson for putting together a bipartisan task force so we can get as much information to find out what happened here.
	Today's conversation regarding the attempted assassination of former President Trump is a critical one that I pray never happens again.
	Throughout my law enforcement career, I held many leadership positions.
	And through those roles, I've coordinated with the White House, advanced teams, state and local law enforcement, and doing some of these very same similar type events.
	And we have one goal in mind, and that's to keep people safe.
	Because of a massive failure in communication, President Trump was shot from a little more than a football field away.
	Secret Service leadership, especially former directors, spectators were forced to do what the Secret Service failed to do, and that was protect themselves from bullets.
	Ultimately, this led to the death of Corey Compertor, who gave his life while bravely shielding his wife and children during this terrible thing.
	Colonel, thank you for being here today, and I've said...
	From the beginning, if you want answers, you got to talk to the men and women who were on the ground, the law enforcement officers who were out there, and who were taking directions and commands from the leadership of Secret Service and various other leaders.
	You testified that 32 members of PSP were assigned to various roles to assist the Secret Service.
	Is that correct?
	Yes, sir, I did.
	Your officers were assigned to various roles, but they were not responsible for securing the building.
	Is that correct?
	Yes, sir.
	The former director testified yesterday that the building was outside the Secret Service secured perimeter.
	Did the U.S.
	Secret Service leadership direct local or state police that that was their job to secure the building?
	So, as I stated earlier, aside from the briefing that I received about the walkthrough, when the question was raised and the response.
	From the advance team of the Secret Service, the agents on the pre-plan, that that was going to be the responsibility of Butler ESU.
	I have no first-hand knowledge about any interaction between the Secret Service and any other entity, really.
	The Secret Service established and managed the primary command post for communications in the office of the Butler Farm Show.
	Is that correct?
	That's my understanding, sir, yes.
	Preliminary findings have concluded that communications were...
	Siloed and local law enforcement were not in frequent radio contact directly with the Secret Service.
	Local SWAT and sniper teams were on a separate radio channels from patrol.
	Colonel, do your radios have the capability to be programmed to be in contact with other agencies?
	And do you know if the officers on the ground that day had communication capabilities with the Secret Service that was on that duty that day?
	You're asking me a very specific question that I would defer to our Bureau of Communication and Information Services.
	I can get you an answer as to what those were.
	Thank you very much.
	Do you know if the Secret Service provided any guidance on combined communications?
	I do not.
	Again, referring, I have not seen their operations plan.
	At 5.45 p.m., a local law enforcement sniper observed the suspect with a range finder and reported the suspect to command into U.S. Secret Service.
	Colonel, how would you have responded to that information?
	So, again, I certainly wouldn't articulate that at that point a rangefinder, which could have legal and legitimate use, that that is a threat, but it's certainly a highly suspicious activity that should be addressed.
	Exactly. Mr. Woese.
	You testified clear and constant communication is crucial to ensure the security of the protectee and that local law enforcement should be part of the command post to facilitate real-time information sharing and rapid response to emerging situations.
	As we all know, separate communications are necessary and effective during a large-scale event like this.
	There's no way everybody can be on the same channel.
	You talk over each other, you won't ever get anything done.
	But there must be some clear understandings through communications at the beginning so that split-second decisions can be made so there won't be a lapse in time and these terrible things happen.
	Would you like to just say a few words about that?
	Sir, there's no doubt when you look at how many people are involved in an operation like this, having everyone on one channel is difficult.
	But there are people within contained areas, and their ability to be able to communicate as things change across platforms is crucial.
	In this case, we know that in seconds, things unfolded.
	In seconds, getting meaningful communication out.
	Seconds, minutes, hours, who knows?
	Might be able to act on that communication is vital.
	So I think there's avenues here.
	I agree that not everyone should be on the same channel, but there are certain people within certain areas and perimeters that should be having communication or the ability to communicate a little more freer.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	I yield back.
	Gentleman yields.
	I now recognize Mr. D. Esposito representing the New York law enforcement community as well for five minutes of testimony.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good afternoon.
	Thank you both for your service.
	On July 13th, we witnessed the Secret Service fail to secure the Pennsylvania field and keep the former president of the United States of America and the Americans that were gathered there safe.
	While President Trump thankfully survived this horrific attack, Corey Competore, a volunteer fire chief, a father, and a husband died.
	While shielding his family from the assassin's bullets.
	Two others, David Dutch and James Copenhaver, were both struck by bullets and are still recovering.
	The Secret Service failed.
	Quite frankly, they failed miserably.
	And Colonel Paris, Mr. Yoz, Mr. Ezell, myself, we could probably combine our law enforcement experience.
	And have no question that there was failures that day.
	You could probably ask someone who just graduated from a police academy or a veteran with 40 years on the job, and they would agree.
	So my first question is to Colonel Paris.
	I know that you mentioned over the last year you've had close to 20 interactions with the Secret Service and visits.
	During his presidency, Pennsylvania has been the second most visited state by President Biden.
	If you could go over again, what is your coordination with the Secret Service?
	What does it normally look like ahead of a visit from the President of the United States?
	So I would say the basic timeline is the same.
	We are notified at some point that there's going to be a visit of a protectee or the President and everybody in between.
	The venue is ultimately secured, the logistics, and then there's planning at the request of the Secret Service, and our default position is to attempt to partner and give them all the support that we can.
	Okay. Now, I know that Mr. Menendez had similar questions, but I just want to reiterate because I think it's critically important.
	Of the dozens of times that you've dealt with visits from the President of the United States, And I'm sure you've thought about this dozens and dozens of times at this point and read through emails and thought about different incidents.
	Compared to the incident on July 13th, was there anything different from the way that this was handled?
	Not to my knowledge, sir.
	Okay. So at approximately 5.51 p.m., Pennsylvania State Police notified the Secret Service of a subject with a rangefinder.
	That was 20 minutes before the gunman This is for either one of you.
	What should have happened next?
	So ideally I would say that Mr. Crooks could have been encountered and intercepted.
	That would have been the ideal.
	Well, again, I have no direct knowledge.
	I want to make that clear.
	But I think also we need to assess the threat and determine whether there's a need to withhold the asset from the stage.
	So I think we all know what should have happened, right?
	20 minutes passed.
	There was someone who eventually took a shot at a former president of the United States and killed two innocent Americans.
	So we know what did happen.
	We know what should have happened.
	What do you say to those that are saying that local law enforcement failed to provide adequate security at this rally?
	They did.
	What do you expect me to say?
	As I stated earlier, based on everything I know up until day 10, I only am going to comment on the Pennsylvania State Police, and it's my belief as I sit here, based on all the information that I have, That we met or exceeded our expectations for that event.
	Am I saying that the event was a success?
	Obviously it was not.
	They did their job.
	It was Secret Service.
	And I will echo the fact that local law enforcement plays a huge role, and it must.
	I don't think the federal agencies have the ability with bandwidth to be able to have this event without coordinated effort with local law enforcement.
	To my knowledge, local law enforcement did what their responsibilities and directions were.
	And Mr. Uros, we've corresponded about this prior, but I just want to, in the last 20 seconds I have, the United States Secret Service established and managed the primary command post.
	Would you agree, Colonel, that in the United States of America, we have a serious issue when it comes to law enforcement and communicating through multiple jurisdictions and agencies at a singular event?
	I would say the short answer is it depends, but communications are always a critical piece to any successful operation.
	So I agree it does depend, but I do have a concern.
	When some people's lives are on the lines, when we are supposed to be protecting an asset...
	Regardless of who it is, but especially someone who was the President of the United States.
	The fact that law enforcement agencies are communicating at such a critical time via text message is a problem.
	And it's one that I think this committee and other committees need to take a real hard look at.
	Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
	Gentlemen, I now recognize Mr. Strong for a five-minute question.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Thank you for being here today.
	I think we all agree that none of us ever wanted to be holding a hearing like this.
	As we have covered, the Secret Service relies on federal, state, and local partners to coordinate and secure events to ensure the safety of its protectee.
	As both of you rightly emphasized in your testimony, Secret Service is the ultimate responsible and the final arbiter.
	Of any and all security matters affecting their protectee.
	Full stop.
	Mr. Yose, you also went on to highlight the importance of mutual respect, trust, and shared commitment in the relationship between Secret Service, the state, and locals.
	I was pleased to learn that Director Cheadle has tendered her resignation.
	This is the first time we have seen real accountability from the Director following July 13th.
	It is my hope the truth will now come.
	Her lack of leadership following the assassination attempt has not only impeded the ongoing investigation and eroded the public's trust, but it is also the potential to erode the mutual respect and trust that are fundamental to this relationship between the Secret Service and partners they rely on.
	Colonel Paris, I understand that state and locals were the ones that first alerted the command center of a suspicious individual some 20 minutes before he started shooting.
	Is that correct?
	As I said before, I would agree with the sequence of events, but I don't want to go on the record with the exact time.
	That's my understanding of the sequence of events.
	Does the Pennsylvania State Police use a digital radio system, whether it be the P25 or something of that nature?
	Yes, we do.
	And it has unbelievable technology.
	I know we've utilized it throughout the state of Alabama 40 years.
	And as a first responder to go from UHF, VHF, to a digital system changes the ballgame.
	Does the Secret Service also use a digital radio system?
	I would have to get you information on that.
	I don't know, sir.
	Okay. So the communication between the agencies, you start looking at it.
	The communication with a digital radio system, you can change frequencies.
	You can make a mutual frequency.
	Every radio has, you can have hundreds of different frequencies.
	But as far as you're not sure if they have a digital radio system or if they're using...
	Another conventional UHF or VHF frequency or something of that nature?
	In answer to the first part, I'm not an expert on radios.
	I can't reiterate an opinion on what their system is, but the only answer I would provide is my understanding is there are certain encrypted capabilities that the Secret Service has to maintain that may provide difficulty in what would otherwise be.
	If we had a regular incident, we were able to set up a patch to communicate across agencies.
	Thank you.
	Colonel Parris, as you just shared, after state and locals identified the shooter as suspicious, they relayed that information to Secret Service and were given a number to send their concerns to.
	Is this standard operating procedures to be left a phone number to give your information to rather than direct communications through radio?
	I don't want to say that it's standard operating procedure, but if it was a system or a measure that worked to push that information to the people who needed it in the most expeditious means, I wouldn't be averse to going away from standard protocols.
	You said that you had done this type of event with other presidents or in your state.
	In past history, is this how it usually was done?
	I can't say that I have had a personal experience about...
	I've obviously been present when there were suspicious people that came out over the radio and law enforcement was seeking them, but I can't say that I have a frame of reference exactly on point here, sir.
	Did the Secret Service provide rules of engagement for state and locals?
	Did y'all have to authorize a green light for fire, or do you go by your day-to-day activity?
	We would go by the policy and regulations.
	Another thing that stood out to me with a background in emergency medical services is when the president was brought off, you saw his SUV move about 20 feet and then it sat there.
	We watched as a lady in a skirt walked in front of the SUV.
	We watched as other law enforcement people, spectators, whatever.
	Did you notice that that seemed to be a long time for the president to be sitting for someone that had...
	Taking a bullet.
	Did you think that was a long time?
	I would completely defer to the Secret Service.
	Thank you.
	Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
	Gentlemen, yields.
	I now recognize Mr. Crane for five minutes of questions.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	I'd like the staff to go ahead and play the video that I took at the site yesterday.
	Let's see this.
	Okay, that's out the window.
	I want to pause it here because I want them to break down what we're looking at and where the shoot is.
	Where the supposed sniper took his shot.
	Supposed sniper, interesting.
	It's not that steep at all.
	We just had a 70-year-old man back here climb up on the roof easily.
	See that water tower behind me?
	Had Secret Service or anybody had sniper teams up there.
	This guy wouldn't have made it five feet up this roof.
	He would have been taken out.
	Behind me, you see the windows.
	Okay, here we go.
	This is the important part.
	Where was the speaking podium?
	Can you guys cut it right there, please?
	I thought someone was talking to me.
	That's good footage, man.
	Thank you.
	Okay, here we go.
	All right, Colonel Paris, did you notice when you showed up on site what the tallest structure on the site was?
	Well, the water tower.
	I can't say at the moment that I arrived that I did no surgery.
	Okay. Now that you've had a chance to go back and look over it, what is the tallest structure on that site?
	The water tower.
	Absolutely. Colonel, do you know how far the water tower was from the roof where the shooter took his shot?
	160 yards.
	160 yards, sir.
	Who made the decision, Colonel, not to put a counter-sniper team on the tallest structure by far on the site with 360 degree surveillance?
	Do you have any idea?
	I do not know, sir.
	We'd like to get that answer.
	Did you see the video that showed me sticking my phone out the second-story window?
	Yes. Yes, sir.
	Okay. Exposing the coverage of the window of the entire roof.
	Are you aware that local law enforcement and Secret Service had full access to that building in that room?
	My understanding is that they did.
	Yeah. Why weren't security teams, sir, on site able to spot a 20-year-old kid with zero camouflage crawling up a white roof with an AR-15 that several rally-goers were screaming and yelling and pointing out, and they noticed him, and they weren't even there to conduct security.
	No, two minutes before.
	They were there to watch the president.
	I can't answer that.
	It was not our responsibility.
	Why the security teams couldn't find that guy.
	I do not, sir.
	Would the gentleman yield for just a second on that?
	So just for clarification, it was the ESU guys that were manning those buildings, and they left because of the call of the suspicious person.
	So they left their post there to go look for him.
	They're the same individuals who attempted to climb up the building and were scared away by the shooter pointing the gun, right?
	I reclaimed my time.
	Thank you.
	I'm just wondering why they weren't able to find him, because even while they were looking, they could have still looked out that window that they had access to.
	All right.
	Colonel Paris, I'm just going to say it.
	Are you aware, sir, that many Americans believe this was very likely not a lone shooter, but a coordinated assassination attempt?
	Have you been getting those messages from people like I have?
	I have not, sir.
	You haven't?
	Oh, crap.
	There's a lot of people in this room that have been getting the same messages.
	Yeah, I've been getting the messages.
	What do you think that is?
	Why do you think that a lot of Americans are like, this doesn't add up, this doesn't make sense.
	Well, it doesn't have to be two shooters.
	How could this many things have gone wrong?
	Like the things I pointed out, a 20-year-old kid got 150 yards of the president of the United States with an AR-15, flew a drone to conduct sight surveillance, was spotted with a rangefinder, ranging targets, then lost.
	had advanced explosive devices on him with no military training.
	I was a sniper in the SEAL team's colonel.
	As soon as I got out of the SUV and I saw that water tower, I was like, that's exactly where I'd be.
	Put me right there.
	So obvious.
	After partisan attempts to bankrupt him, imprison him for 750 years and countless depictions.
	As a modern-day Hitler, are you surprised, sir, that a lot of Americans are like, maybe there's more to this story?
	I wouldn't begin to speculate about what the American people think, sir.
	Colonel, did your team make entry and conduct investigation at the suspect's home?
	No. Prior to the shooting?
	Excuse me, sir.
	Did your team make entry and conduct any investigation at the suspect's home?
	Oh, was he known?
	Participated in that securing of it.
	There were bomb assets that we provided.
	Mr. Chairman, can I have 30 more seconds?
	Yeah, yeah.
	I'm letting everybody count.
	Okay. On the night of.
	Since then, none...
	Did you get any reports from any of your agents of anything fishy at the home?
	Before the shooting.
	I was briefed on...
	Was there any silverware found in the home or trash?
	I have nothing in the briefing.
	What does that mean?
	Silver? Was it extremely clean, almost like a medical lab?
	Were you giving any of those reports?
	I was not giving any of those details.
	Okay, that's what I'm hearing.
	Interesting. The last thing I want to enter into the record, Mr. Chairman.
	That's weird.
	I hadn't heard that.
	I hadn't heard any of that.
	Article, opinion from, I believe, the Washington Post.
	By Robert Kagan, a Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable.
	We should stop pretending.
	This article compares Trump to Caesar and attempts to justify the assassination of President Trump.
	And I think even though we want to dodge around it and not make this partisan...
	I think we all know that a lot of this has to do with the rhetoric, the very violent rhetoric that has led up to this.
	Thank you.
	I yield back.
	Gentlemen, yields and so ordered on the entry of that into the record.
	I now recognize Mr. Burkine for five minutes of testimony.
	Our witness questioning.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	Alexander, would you mind moving that just a little bit forward here so I can...
	Colonel Paris, can you see that or am I obstructing your view?
	I believe I can see it, sir.
	Alexander, would you mind?
	I'm sorry.
	Can we shift it just a little bit to your left, Alexander?
	There we go.
	Okay. Better?
	Yes, sir.
	Okay. So this is a picture I took yesterday on the grounds, looking out of that second-story window that has the corridor that connects the AGR building, the American Glass Research Building, with where the shooter's location...
	I'm going to stand up, and I'm going to point to the shooter's location as we were made aware.
	And in the chat, tell me what the relevance was of the cleanliness.
	That X is where the shooter was shared with us.
	His body was found.
	From this viewpoint, there's some videos that make it look like he's more this direction, but from the perception, it kind of is confusing.
	But he was more towards that opposite side.
	This window...
	Wide open.
	Second story.
	It's the second window from the right side.
	That window has this view where they could clearly, those ESU officers that were stationed, given access by the property owner to that window, could see the shooter had they stayed in that manned position.
	This is there, moving towards the location of President Trump with the red barns back here.
	His stage was right in front of that.
	And you can see a window here that is absolutely going to obstruct the view.
	To be able to look to the 20 or 30 different barn structures, the cattle building, the sheep building, the hog building, the rodeo arena by the pond.
	Many structures.
	There's 50 buildings within a 500-yard radius of where President Trump was at.
	So many vulnerabilities.
	Do you see a problem with that window being in the way of someone being able from this position to be able to take care of the asset?
	A casement window would...
	Present a tactical concern for full field.
	And I understand potentially, you know, this was air conditioning on top of the second story building, was it?
	And so maybe that was a consideration.
	But ultimately, Secret Service is the one who made the determination of placement or contacting or making sure the plan was in coordination with the property owner for allowing, gaining admittance from the property owner for the second story window.
	Is that correct?
	That was Secret Service's plan.
	Correct. Ultimately, it's on Secret Service.
	It's on Secret Service for that plan.
	All right.
	Is it true that the building is owned by BlackRock?
	If it's their plan, did they not indicate that someone had to stay manned in that location?
	Because we're being told that when the two officers, local PD, were trying to lift themselves on the opposite side to get a look at the gentleman, and he turns his gun and they dropped off the building, this would have been a perfect opportunity for someone to be on the radio.
	They could have taken him out from this location.
	Did the Secret Service plan not include directives from staying in those positions?
	I don't know, sir.
	You don't know.
	All right, here's another question.
	With the two minutes that you said that there was an opportunity from the time that they were hoisted up, looked at the shooter, you're given the responsibility, as this is delegating the outer perimeter, to secure the area.
	Why weren't they able to immediately call their supervisor?
	Who would then be authorized to issue a hold on the asset or a get him off the stage call?
	Why does it have to be, as your testimony says, they took a picture, sent it to Secret Service 20 minutes before the incident, the shooting, and they have to wait for a response?
	Why is not the line of communication, I understand they're on different radio frequencies, why were they not empowered to say, if we send something suspicious, then state police, local law enforcement?
	Sheriff's department, each one, the head official, each one of those departments, if we entrusted them with enough responsibility to secure that environment, then we ought to give them the responsibility to issue a hold call because of something that they see as a threat.
	Are they empowered to do that, or does it have to all go through Secret Service to issue a hold?
	I can only say what I know about the state police operations plan, and I do not know the answer to your question, sir.
	I do not know the answer.
	I don't know what the protocol would be to issue the hold order.
	And just as a point of clarification, I tried to clean up with the congressman from New Jersey before, when the two municipal officers were...
	Can I jump on that?
	Two to three minutes, because I've got limited time here.
	Just to make sure, that was seconds before.
	That was seconds before Crooks started firing.
	Okay, you had said earlier today it was two to three minutes, but you're saying seconds before.
	I cleaned that up for a second time.
	Yes, sir.
	Okay. But even if they're hoisting, your testimony today, if I understood you correctly, it was two different officers that were hoisting to get a look at him, not the ones who were manned in this view.
	That is my understanding, yes, sir.
	Okay, so had they remained in there, they immediately would have seen the incident taking place if they were on the same line of communication, and they could have taken the asset out.
	I'm remiss to say that because I don't know what their general rules of engagement and assignment were.
	From the Secret Service.
	This looks to me like a major breakdown of communication.
	This procedure looks to me like it is lapsed with the ability of someone who, if they entrust them with the ability to secure these perimeter, they ought to be empowered enough to be able to give the authority on their comms to issue a hold.
	I don't understand that.
	With that, I yield, Mr. Chairman.
	I understand it.
	The gentleman yields.
	I'm going to say this because I have...
	Thoroughly enjoyed both of your testimony today.
	And there are a lot of guys up here on both sides of the aisle that are charged about this.
	Their emotion is not intended to communicate a lack of trust in the Pennsylvania State Police.
	You're being incredibly helpful today.
	Some of the things that we've discovered from your testimony have...
	Brought some frustration to our folks.
	And I hope you'll understand it in that context.
	The energy is not directed at you.
	The failure to set up appropriate communication systems and to make decisions when they become aware of someone pointing a rangefinder is what's got people upset.
	And that's on secret service.
	So I just wanted to make sure you all heard that from me.
	Mr. Chairman.
	If I was amped up a little bit, I concur.
	So, greatly respect what you're doing.
	I now recognize Ms. Lee for five minutes of testimony.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing and for organizing this committee's trip to Butler, Pennsylvania.
	For us, being on the ground in Butler, Pennsylvania yesterday made clear the severity of the security failures on Saturday, July 13th.
	Those failures that almost allowed former President Donald Trump to be assassinated.
	Unfortunately, what has followed that failed assassination attempt is an erosion of public trust related to those responsible for keeping the President and the attendees of the rally safe.
	We've heard that because of a sloped roof, law enforcement was not able to safely secure the area that day.
	We've heard reports that certain officers abandoned their posts due to weather conditions.
	We've heard the Secret Service attempt to ship blame to state and local law enforcement, asserting that they failed to secure certain areas in the perimeter.
	Secret Service Chief Cheadle's resignation this morning is the first of many steps that need to be taken, and today's hearing is just the beginning of our process to get Clear, accurate information about this issue, about the failures associated with that day, and ensure that not only Congress, but that the American public get the answers that they deserve about these events.
	Mr. Yost, I'd like to start with you.
	The Secret Service is always the lead in providing security for these types of events that involve one of their protectees, but they clearly rely on their partnerships with state and local law enforcement as they move to different locations around the country.
	Are you concerned that former Director Cheadle's comments to ABC News, which many people heard as blame-shifting to local law enforcement, could undermine the level of trust between Yes, I absolutely do.
	And our organization actually issued a press release stating just that.
	It's impossible for a federal agency to do their function without including local law enforcement.
	That's a given.
	And that relationship is built on trust.
	And when comments were made, like what made on ABC, then we felt the need to call her out on it.
	Oh yeah, there you go.
	And do you believe that the federal government's statements to the public, to the American people, after this attempted assassination, have helped or harmed public trust and law enforcement overall?
	You know, I'll say this.
	The very powers that we have are the ability to do our job as law enforcement officers is directly related to trust.
	And in an investigation, there's a fine line between what you do in order to protect an investigation and also be accountable to the public you serve.
	And when you don't walk that fine line, then it does create distrust.
	And it does cause a lot of confusion.
	A lot of causes people to fill in their own blanks.
	And as a result, this is what we see.
	Accurate information is important to keep everyone informed so that it doesn't run in different directions.
	And as the American people wait for an after-action report, what can or should law enforcement agencies at any level be doing to address concerns about transparency and protect that public trust?
	Well, I'll start right here.
	I mean, you have the Pennsylvania State Police.
	It's filled in a lot of gaps that should have been filled in a long time ago.
	This is information that should be known to everyone.
	You know, essential facts.
	It doesn't change.
	It is what it is.
	And sharing this information lets everyone know exactly what occurred and gives us some insight of things that we need to correct.
	And you've been here now throughout this day, throughout questioning from a number of members of this committee.
	As this committee continues to investigate the failures that resulted in this shooting, what are some of the key questions that you believe should be asked about the assassination attempt as well as the management and organization of Secret Service more broadly?
	Well, you know, again, I have to, you know, be...
	Upfront in the fact that I have no direct knowledge to this incident or things that unfold.
	I'll just speak in just general terms.
	The first question that I think we all need to ask is, with so many elevated positions available, what steps were taken to protect those assets?
	I don't know the answer to that, but there were a lot of places.
	I mean, we learned a lot of lessons going back there to President Kennedy.
	Higher locations create unique problems.
	And as a result, they should have been part of any action plan.
	I'm not saying they weren't.
	I'm just saying that we see the end result of what happened here.
	So obviously we have a failure there.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
	I yield back.
	The gentlelady yields back and now recognize the gentleman in whose district this tragedy occurred.
	Fine representative from Pennsylvania, Mr. Kelly.
	I guess they didn't like Cheadle throwing them under the bus.
	Thank you, Mr. Bishop.
	I appreciate Chairman Green's allowing me to be here.
	To be in Butler yesterday, where it's my hometown.
	I'm four miles from this location.
	My concern actually started on July the 5th when I was told that former President Trump was coming to Butler.
	And I said, that's great.
	And they said, yeah, and he's going to be at the Butler Farm Show.
	I said, you must mean the Big Butler Fair.
	They said, no, the Butler Farm Show.
	Last minute change from the airport.
	The site to visit.
	The answer is we've already made our determination.
	My question was, so then what you just told me is nobody's been to that site.
	I will just tell you right now that what you are planning there is not proper for the crowd that's going to show up.
	At that point, the person on the phone said, Mr. Kelly, there'll be 6,000 or 7,000 people there.
	I said, well, that tells me even more about the fact that you have no idea where you're going.
	And historically, what has happened whenever President Trump had come to Butler, we got 55,000 people at that rally.
	He said that was before when he was president.
	He's no longer president.
	So being there, not only just myself, but also my wife, three of my grandchildren, one of my sons, and so many friends that were there that day, I think it all comes down to the same question that we always ask when we get to these situations.
	What did we know and when did we know it?
	And I think forever now, people are going to look at what happened and say, we knew there was something wrong.
	And we did nothing about it.
	We could see it.
	They let it happen on purpose.
	I would just put to you that had we acted quicker, Mr. Compertori would still be alive today.
	President Trump would not have been wounded.
	And two other people who were that day would not have been wounded.
	And in a greater sense, The American people have been wounded in a way that they have lost faith, trust, and confidence in how we protect certain people.
	I like this guy.
	This goes far beyond that, and I appreciate you both being here, and I'll tell you what.
	You really have given us testimony based on what your whole careers have been about, and that is protecting people.
	For some reason, on July 13th, we knew something was wrong.
	Every person I've talked to that was there that day or responsible for protection says, we did our job.
	And I said, so then you're saying that somebody else didn't do their job.
	And the answer is, well, that's to be decided later on.
	So I would just say, first of all...
	It certainly wasn't.
	I meant what I said.
	I think the American people now are deeply wounded, and the faith, trust, and confidence we need to have in our government has been fading, has been fading for too long.
	I was here with the Pennsylvania State Police.
	I've talked to the Pennsylvania State Police since then.
	I like this guy.
	Who is this guy?
	Thank you for your career.
	But at the end of the day, we don't have the answers we need to have.
	And I just, I said it earlier, and I mean it.
	There is no reason for Corey Compromitore to be dead today.
	There is no reason.
	For President Trump to have been wounded or two other members in the audience that day to have been wounded, had we done what we knew before we let it go any further than that.
	That could have been stopped early on.
	Nobody can convince me that when people see somebody on the roof of a building...
	And pointing to him and yelling, there's somebody up there.
	It needs to be taken care of.
	And other people who were there, the eyewitnesses said, they watched him go onto those grounds.
	And every time they said, there's something wrong, somebody is going in the wrong direction and shouldn't be there.
	And the answer comes down, you don't know what you're talking about.
	There's nobody there.
	So as we continue looking at this, and I think that we have a lot of testimony today.
	Again, I thank you for being there, but I just submit to you that the victims of that day are innocent people.
	None of it had to happen.
	We knew beforehand, and we could have prevented it, but we failed to act when we should have acted.
	So I appreciate your careers and everything you've done.
	And Chairman, I appreciate the fact that I've been able to be here today and that you came to our town yesterday.
	In a town that I have lived, this spot is a place I've been at many, many, many times.
	I just cannot understand why we didn't act when we knew there was something wrong.
	At the very least, they could have taken President Trump off the podium, and some of the other activity after that never would have taken place.
	So thank you for having me here, and thank you both, Colonel.
	Thank you so much for being here.
	I appreciate it, but there is far, far more we have to learn.
	Thank you, sir.
	Thank you.
	I like that, man.
	We're going to do another round of questioning, and I don't know, Mr. Cray, if you're going to want to ask any other questions.
	I have a question.
	Okay, sounds good.
	So you'll follow me, and then we'll go around.
	I just want to get back to this text message that was sent at about 20 to 25 minutes prior.
	That text message was a picture of Crooks.
	Was it a picture of him pointing the rangefinder or of him just looking suspicious?
	Chairman, I have not seen the picture that was sent, so I don't know.
	Put it up on the board.
	My understanding is, to the best of my briefings, it was the pictures that were initially taken by Butler ESU.
	Okay, so that was the 62 minute prior.
	Okay. At 20, 25 minutes prior, though, someone saw him pointing a rangefinder and taking range estimation or range readings, right?
	I don't know what he was doing, but that's what the picture says.
	I think I don't want to speculate as to what he actually was doing with the rangefinder, but the rangefinder, my understanding is, was the heightened suspicion, yes, sir.
	And he was pointing it?
	I mean, because a rangefinder...
	I guess you can have it digital and do it like this, but there are also rangefinders you look through and you have a reading.
	Do you know description of the rangefinder?
	It was not brief to me.
	Okay. But there was concern, and that was relayed to the command post, and that was a PSP guy in the Secret Service command post via a text message 20-something minutes before, and you'd think it included the fact that the guy had a rangefinder.
	My understanding is yes.
	Okay. Then you mentioned that the two ESU guys that were in the second story, it's honestly, in truth, to me it appears to be a second building behind it that got joined by all these different, the breakup of that whole complex and the intricacies of places to hide and move around, all the little alleyways, is because they built tunnelways.
	Not tunnels, but hallways that were covered between each of these different buildings.
	So it's actually a separate building with an amended...
	Connector. Yep.
	So there are two guys in that building.
	They leave to go look for the guy, the suspicious person.
	My understanding is, yes, according to interviews.
	So they were not manning.
	They did not have oversight on that rooftop because they were out looking for the guy.
	Correct. My understanding is it was a...
	The grounds around there, to see it photographed now or on your tour yesterday, without scores of people traversing from different parking areas to make ingress into the secure perimeter, that there was a concerted effort to try and identify and make contact with him.
	Sure. In conjunction with other, I was briefed that there were two other suspicious individuals that, simultaneous to this, not terribly.
	Too far away, distance-wise, I don't have the specifics, but it's all occurring contemporaneously.
	But one of them, Crooks, had a rangefinder, and so they leave and they go, look, he's suspicious.
	That leaves that building with two sets of eyes that could have observed it, granted, by exposing themselves.
	And by the way, I would think they could stay in the building as opposed to being on top of it for their own sort of defilade position.
	I get that as a sniper works.
	But, you know, you've got to be able to see it.
	So anyway, they leave.
	Was Secret Service notified that they were leaving to go look for this guy and thus those eyes on top of the building not?
	I do not know.
	And the other thing that I do not know is where else Butler ESU sent that information.
	I have not been briefed on that.
	Who told them to go look?
	Do you know if they were told to go look?
	I do not know, sir.
	We just know that they did go look.
	This is the ESU.
	A very concerted effort with all of those alcoves and all of those buildings was made.
	There were two additional officers who, again, I don't know the specifics of the timeline.
	I don't know the specifics of the logistics of how that information was relayed, but I'm briefed that they came and they made a very concerted effort to try and locate crooks.
	But it seems to me that that was leaving that extra set of eyes on top of the building.
	You know, it would be something I, if I were the site commander at that point, I'd want to know two guys are leaving a post where they have observation on a building and that somebody relayed that to me so that I would know, wait a minute, now two sets of eyes that were on the building.
	You know what I'm saying?
	It's like if you pull security, if you pull your lateral security in an ambush or something.
	I'm talking like an army guy now.
	And the commander's going to know that that guy's moved away from there, and now he's got a blind spot, right?
	So I just want to make sure, I want to dig into that a little more.
	Obviously, you don't have the answer, so we'll dig elsewhere.
	But I find it interesting that they leave, this guy is so suspicious, has a rangefinder, they leave their post that they are manning to go look for him.
	Yet Secret Service, and they get told about it 20 to 25 minutes beforehand.
	But Secret Service still lets the president go on the stage.
	I'm just totally blown away by that.
	But again, there's more details to be had.
	Thank you for being here.
	I really appreciate it.
	I'm going to turn it over now to the ranking member for his five minutes of questioning.
	Gentlemen, thank you for being here today.
	Commissioner Paris, Mr. Yotes, we're looking...
	A lot of good questions from both sides of the aisle.
	Commissioner Paris, you don't have the luxury of time.
	You're protecting governor and you'll be protecting high-profile candidates in your battleground state like right about now.
	I'm trying to figure out how we help you do your job a whole lot better.
	Mr. Kelly, his line of questioning was interesting.
	And I consider it important because that's his background.
	That's his backyard.
	And he asked, who decided the site of the event?
	It's a good question.
	Bigger question is, who okays, who approves the site of an event?
	And I come back to what I said earlier, which is one of those officers on the ground said, Lou, he said, Who's in charge?
	The Secret Service says good or bad.
	Does the campaign then say good or bad, or does the campaign have the ability to override the Secret Service at any event?
	It was supposed to be at the airport.
	The airport said we can't do it anymore.
	Go do it at Butler Fields.
	You're going to have to make these decisions here real soon.
	Because if I'm here where you're at today, Today, you've learned some lessons.
	Yeah, don't trust secret service.
	13th to today, we've all learned some lessons, and you have to execute, sir.
	And it's not your responsibility.
	It's not our responsibility.
	It's all of us our responsibility.
	And I want to know how we can help you clarify these lines of command, so to speak, to make sure that we minimize the possibilities of this happening again.
	Who makes the decisions?
	Who's in charge?
	What are the lessons we've learned today, gentlemen?
	What are the lessons we've learned today?
	They tried to kill Donald Trump.
	What is it that we can do to make sure that it's not going to be on your shoulders?
	You're not going to be able to resign.
	You have to execute.
	Please. I appreciate your comments very much.
	I can say that through the governor and the legislature in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, we are very supported.
	And we have the resources, I believe, moving forward to rise to the occasion.
	The Secret Service remains the agency with the most experience, traditionally, when you talk about organizational knowledge to carry this forward.
	Responsible for the Pennsylvania State Police, I pledge that any and all support that we can give to keep all Pennsylvanians safe, which is what...
	6,400 enlisted Pennsylvania State Police show up every day to do.
	We will do.
	We want a robust republic, and we want to secure people's ability to express their views, and we have worked diligently and will continue to work diligently to make sure that that happens, sir. Commissioner Parris, you are the thin blue line.
	Keeps us safe.
	Secret Service is an even thinner line that keeps, in many ways, our democracy functioning.
	They have to score 100%.
	They cannot let one bad thing happen as they did on the 13th.
	I want to make sure that we know that we give the Secret Service the ability to make those decisions when it comes to the safety of our candidates and elected officials.
	And for the third time, I'm going to repeat those words that were told to me by an individual, law enforcement individual on the ground when he said, Lou, who's in charge?
	Is it the campaign?
	Or is it the Secret Service?
	And I'd like to get to the bottom of that and make sure it's the Secret Service that's in charge.
	I don't know who is in charge, and I hope to God that we do find out.
	And I hope it's a Secret Service.
	And if it is a Secret Service, it reaffirms that they are in charge.
	Oh, they're in charge.
	The buck stops somewhere.
	It's got to be here.
	This committee, the government, with us in Congress.
	Gentlemen, thank you very much.
	And Mr. Chairman, I yield.
	The gentleman yields back.
	I now recognize myself for five minutes of questioning.
	Colonel Paris and Mr. Hughes, I appreciate your patience.
	And continuing through this questioning.
	And I would submit that I think your candor, Colonel Parris, has been very refreshing.
	And it paints a clear contrast from what was the testimony of the director of the Secret Service yesterday.
	Oh boy, she's gone.
	They're still not done with her.
	Her resignation doesn't resolve a thing.
	Testify. And in fact, the criminal investigation that your department is undertaking, that presumably Butler authorities may be involved in, FBI is undertaking, those don't really resolve anything.
	They have a fixed criminal liability of someone who's presumably, if they acted alone, is dead.
	What is the most important issue is we have a national security crisis.
	We have right now, the only person who's been inactivated, as I understand it, is the sharpshooter who took the...
	Perp out.
	The people who made what appear to be unbelievably horrendous decisions.
	You can't even imagine.
	It boggles the mind, the decisions that were made.
	They're still in place.
	And we have multiple protectees moving around the country every day.
	And those same people, I don't even know if they've changed anything about what they're doing.
	Presumably you would think so, but we don't know that.
	I think we need to learn as much as possible from you.
	I will say as a note of departure, I don't think, from what I've heard, you've made pretty clear the Pennsylvania State Police didn't do anything wrong.
	I don't know whether Butler County ESU might have done something wrong, so let me bear into that.
	Okay, all right.
	But it's clear to me as a bell that Secret Service, and that's everyone's characterized as a colossal failure, because it's obvious to everyone concerned that that's the case.
	The two who were, I'm going to get one thing I understand transpired while I was absent from the hearing for a bit.
	I understand that the two Butler ESU officers who one hoisted the other to the roof line where the Crooks turned and leveled the rifle at him, those were two different ESU officers than the ones that originally spotted Crooks from the second floor.
	Is that correct?
	So just to be clear, my understanding is the two officers that responded, And one hoisted up the second one were not part of Butler ESU.
	They were two separate municipal officers who were tasked with a different responsibility.
	I would speculate as an example to say a traffic post or a...
	Understood. And they responded.
	I don't know, again, the specifics as to how they were alerted, but just to be clear, they were two separate.
	Yes, sir.
	Okay. The ESU, the Butler ESU officers who spotted Crooks.
	Do I understand correctly?
	They spotted him from the second floor of the AGR building.
	That is my understanding.
	Were they posted there in order to maintain overwatch on the roof, or were they generally assigned roving responsibility to be in the vicinity of that building?
	I can't answer that, and I would defer to the Secret Service.
	That's a decent question.
	What was their mandate to be in that building?
	Yeah, you see, Crooks was on the building directly facing the camera here, and you see the window open to the left.
	That's the second story of the AGR building where those ESU officers spotted Crooks, correct?
	That's my understanding.
	Okay. Did they advise their senior, you know, their command that they were departing that location to look for Crooks?
	Do you know that?
	I do not know, sir.
	Why did they stay away from that position for so long?
	If I understand correctly, the picture of Crooks was tested about 20-25 minutes ahead of the shooting.
	Is that correct, first of all?
	Could you ask me that one more time, sir?
	I just want to make sure.
	Was the picture of Crooks that they took, did they take that picture and send it up to their command about 20-25 minutes before the shooting?
	What I want to be specific about is when the PSP member in the command post...
	Received it.
	And I believe that's in the vicinity of 20 to 25 minutes with the caveat prior put on the record about a series of events, not a timeline minute by minute.
	So you don't know whether they...
	I don't specifically know.
	I believe the pictures of Crooks were taken at some point before that when he was identified as being suspicious based on my prior testimony from the briefings that I had because he was...
	Okay, I get it.
	At least we've got a fairly long numbers of minutes, 10, 15, 20 minutes.
	Why did they not return to that post?
	Do you know that?
	I do not know that.
	I do not know, sir.
	My understanding is that there was a very concerted effort at that point to actively search and locate him.
	But they still let Trump on the stage.
	You mentioned that you have asked for, not received, I don't know what you call it, the site plan from the Secret Service has not been given to you.
	The security plan.
	Has there been anything else that you've asked for?
	In the course of your investigation, it's been denied or made inaccessible to you, other than the cycling.
	Again, I want to be clear.
	No, I'm not aware of anything else that we've asked for, and we have not been denied.
	I just believe we haven't received it yet, so I want to make sure I'm not mischaracterizing.
	They didn't say we're not getting it.
	They just haven't given it to us.
	We never get denied stuff.
	We just never get it.
	My time having expired, I recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Lolota.
	Thank you, Chairman.
	Colonel, I want to reiterate the appreciation this committee has.
	All right.
	It's irritable that some of our fellow colleagues are not at the table with you today.
	We would have liked to extract from them some of the facts from 10 days ago.
	My colleagues from both sides of the aisle, I think, asked good, fair questions of you and you gave good, fair, accurate responses to them.
	That helps us understand July 13th a little more.
	It was only 10 days ago.
	We're probably only in the infancy of that investigation of our oversight responsibilities, but you've provided us a lot.
	I want to use the remainder of my time to look forward.
	There's going to be a lot of conjecture about what happened and who's at fault, but putting that aside, we've talked about flaws that happened on July 13th, the tactical flaws about communication, strategic ones like lack of drones, administrative ones like command and control and who has what authority, what are the rules of engagement.
	So I wanted to ask you, Colonel, and it's been said, Pennsylvania is going to have a number of...
	More rallies, appearances, where the public is going to interact with presidential candidates from both sides of the aisle.
	What are you going to do?
	How are you going to assert yourself in your leadership role to reduce the likelihood of an incident like this, specifically with respect to tactics?
	We understand that radio communications were a weakness.
	Do you have a perspective on looking forward, how you might command your officers in a different manner to ensure that...
	From a tactical perspective, specifically with communications, these events are held differently in the future, sir?
	So, yes, I will start with referring to the testimony of Congressman Luttrell about reinforcing and reiterating to try and mitigate any potential complacency.
	The Pennsylvania State Police maintains the Pennsylvania Criminal Intelligence Center.
	We're always trying to lean forward and glean as much criminal intelligence as we can, not only generated within Ranks of the Pennsylvania State Police, but our local partners, our county partners, and then through task force collaborations that we have with multiple federal agencies.
	I can tell you that we will not back away from the Secret Service.
	We will lean forward to support them, and all of the resources of the Pennsylvania State Police will be brought to bear to keep Pennsylvanians and those visiting the Commonwealth safe.
	Have you considered communications specifically?
	Different radios, training on those radios, other communications devices, be it digital or voice or whatever.
	Have you considered prospectively either acquire new technology, implementing new training, or otherwise developing tactics that allow not only state and local to communicate better with each other, but also that communication to be shared more effectively with your federal partners?
	I would say in the short term coming up to the election where there's an extreme temporal component there that would make that difficult.
	Maintaining critical communications during any operation.
	Be it an investigation of a traffic crash or a major investigation of a cab I'm a little bored here.
	Top of the testimony to be a part of.
	Proves that we can be better.
	We're always looking every day to get better.
	I know that members are allowed to, through the appropriations process, advocate for more resources to come to their state and local law enforcement partners.
	For things like communication devices, I know that I've been able to lean into that process here, and I'm sure that Mr. Kelly and others from the Pennsylvania delegation would endeavor to use federal funds to help augment your ability to increase your ability to communicate among each other and also with federal partners.
	I want to move to strategy, thinking a little more outside the bubble in the days and weeks leading up to an event.
	Colonel, do you have a sense on prospectively technology that you use, like drones, other decisions you might make, like stationing somebody on a nearby high vantage point like a water tower?
	You've heard some feedback from some informed members here today.
	Are those things helpful for you to plan moving forward?
	Is this the dumbest question that's ever been asked?
	Both technological and physical for events moving forward?
	Short answer is yes.
	Our undercover assets and the surveillance intelligence gathering is something we rely on heavily.
	We do have...
	Some drone capabilities that we're always looking to augment, but they're a phenomenal tool, and certainly their use will only expand into the future, probably long after my career and somebody who comes well after.
	But we're always looking to lean forward and do the job better, sir.
	And I think what I heard, Colonel, from the totality of the interactions today was administrative issues.
	Issues related to command or control, rules of engagement, who thought they had what authority, who thought they had to call somebody to do something.
	Colonel, do we have your commitment that you'll lean as far forward as possible and essentially command my negation, that you'll do everything that was within your power until you're told to stop to ensure the safety of presidential candidates?
	Yes, sir.
	Thank you, Chairman.
	I yield.
	Okay, are we almost done here?
	Chairman Green is going to return momentarily, so I want to keep the hearing going pending his return.
	And I've got a few more questions, and so I will call a third round of questioning.
	And let me then recognize myself for five minutes.
	Colonel Parris, I think I heard you say in the course of the hearing that you believe Mr. Crooks fired eight shots.
	And that eight shell casings were recovered?
	Did I hear that?
	Yes. Yes, I heard that.
	Were they all recovered in the vicinity of his body?
	I'm told that they were.
	When the information concerning having identified Crooks as a suspicious figure was relayed and the text message was sent to The Secret Service Command Center.
	PSP was present, I understand.
	Is that correct?
	The PSP member who received those from Butler ESU.
	That's what I want to clarify first.
	Was it a PSP member who received that?
	So I can comment that it was a PSP member who received that from Butler ESU.
	And passed it and then advised Secret Service.
	Immediately advised Secret Service and then passed it.
	To a telephone number.
	Texted the information to a telephone number.
	That's what I was briefed.
	It was given by the Secret Service representative.
	Did the Secret Service representative indicate to whom that connected?
	Who was being sent the information via that number?
	I do not know.
	It was going to a local hotline.
	From an interview that we conducted that it was some sort of tactical asset of the Secret Service.
	Was there any comment or discussion in the command center?
	About the advisability of keeping the president off the stage until the matter was resolved, either at that moment or later.
	I do not know, and I would only underscore what I said before, the distinction between suspicion versus a threat.
	at that point I think concerning, but it was still the perspective at the time was suspicious and not yet a threat.
	So the information was relayed from ESU officers to a PSP officer.
	Do I understand that correct?
	Yes. Did ESU have command officers in the command center?
	That was asked earlier, and like I said, I received a briefing that my understanding was that there were Butler County representatives in the command post, but I cannot definitively tell you.
	Do you have any insight why the Butler ESU officers transmitted that information to a PSP representative rather than to a Butler ESU representative in the command center?
	I understand that the Butler ESU person from whom it came and the PSP member to whom it was sent essentially knew one another.
	Was there any mechanism in place to monitor the location presence of the ESU officers who were at the second floor window and departed from there to go look for crooks?
	Was that any kind of communication ongoing in the command center about that?
	I don't know.
	I...
	Is that a regular practice?
	In PSP operations to have someone monitoring the location presence, posting, absence from posts of members of your force?
	I would say in general, you need to know where your assets are deployed, but I would also say, depending on what the prior rules of engagement are, there may be a situation that would realistically, outside of the example we're discussing today, that we would expect our people to make a...
	And a decision in the immediate moment to address another issue.
	I don't understand that.
	I'm done.
	Let's wrap this up.
	We're not making any progress anymore.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman, again, gentlemen.
	Thank you for being here.
	I hate all this faux politeness.
	Something Mr. Lalota said that I want to emphasize and underline, which is...
	Gentlemen, I hope you lean forward when it comes to making decisions, making what your gut tells you is the right decision.
	What the hell are you talking about?
	Trying to protect American lives, especially those of candidates.
	The situation is an interesting one because in this committee, we have been talking about domestic terrorism as being a bigger threat to the United States than foreign terrorism.
	I would imagine, based on the facts that we know him today, this is a domestic individual that God knows what motivated him to do what he's doing.
	He was looking up information according to what I've read.
	He was looking up both Democrat and Republican candidates.
	God knows what set him off or where he was going.
	Or what targets he was really focused on other than possibly the opportunity.
	This is not good news because this is essentially a lone wolf, it would appear.
	God knows what motivated him.
	And I'm bringing this up because, Mr. Yost, you represent thousands of police officers in this country.
	A lot of them doing the job to the best of their abilities.
	And yet, these are challenges that are very hard to take on.
	Thank you.
	Get to the point.
	Based on what your officers say out there, what is it that we can do to make your job better?
	What is it that we can do to begin to get a grip on these lone wolf attacks that are domestically motivated and grown?
	Sir, I'm not too sure.
	I have an easy answer for you on that one.
	I will tell you that we live in extraordinary times right now where we've gone from talking to people to talking at people.
	And I think what you see over a period of time, this has eroded to a part where I think...
	Through social media or whatever events, we've built a community around our own belief systems.
	And I think that, in some ways, is what empowers some people who act out on things.
	We may never understand why some people take the actions they do.
	I think we're just in some extraordinary times with so much hate in our country.
	And that's across the board.
	As a law enforcement officer, we went through that period of time of dehumanization of law enforcement.
	It certainly took a toll on us as a profession.
	I'll give you some examples of how dangerous it is to be a police officer right now.
	Last year, there were 378 officers that were shot in the line of duty.
	60 died.
	And the number of ambush attacks on law enforcement officers were over 100.
	That's last year.
	This year, already the first six months, we're at 200 officers that have been shot in the line of duty.
	Last year?
	Last year was 376.
	And this year we're at?
	This year we're at 200 just in the first six months.
	So we're on par or we'll exceed what last year's been.
	There's just so much hatred in our country right now.
	And I think that I agree with the statements made by pretty much everyone in this room.
	We need to turn the rhetoric down.
	I think it's not serving to anyone.
	The hatred that we have across this country is permeating into everything we have, and everybody owns a little bit of responsibility with it.
	We need to focus on finding solutions to problems rather than blaming others for what the problems are.
	I know that that's not your question, but I think...
	Well, actually, you are answering my question, sir.
	You are answering my question.
	So what can be done, sir?
	We really need to turn our rhetoric down.
	We need to recognize that in reality, this is the reality when it comes to law enforcement.
	The majority of violent crime in this country is committed by a small percentage of people.
	When we're able to separate them from the people that they prey on.
	We impact Prime.
	We struggle in this country because law enforcement officers are doing their job to try and separate that.
	But I think our system has just so many layers in it that shows that it's fractured.
	And we really need to get back to the real business of protecting the people we serve.
	At the end of the day, that's what's most important.
	And so we live in some extraordinary times.
	I look at what happened here on the political stage.
	It doesn't surprise me because this has been happening across our country, across, you know.
	I don't know what that means.
	Commissioner Harris, any thoughts?
	I would just say that we endeavor to try and be the most professional that we can to earn that respect every day.
	I think every encounter of the millions of calls of service that troopers answer across 45,000 square miles of the Commonwealth is an opportunity to establish that.
	Relationship and be professional and do the right thing.
	And that's what I think, you know, sometimes the more complex the problem, the more simple the solution in terms of keeping our focus on being professionals, doing the right thing at the right time, and showing up every day.
	If I can include by saying that thank you for your service to our country and to our communities, keeping us safe.
	And consider us, I think I can speak for everybody up here, consider us partners of yours.
	That's not my mic.
	Work with us, talk to us, not at us, but with us, so we can figure out how to solve some of these issues.
	Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
	The time is up.
	The gentleman yields back, and all time having expired in the second round of questions.
	It's over.
	I would yield to the ranking member for a closing statement if you have one.
	Okay, good.
	Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I do.
	And again, to repeat myself.
	Thank you all for being here.
	Thank you for your service.
	Let's talk with each other.
	Thank our chairman for calling this most important hearing.
	Go after the Secret Service.
	July 13th was a tragedy.
	Can't let it happen again.
	Unless you want to make it happen.
	And that's why we're here today.
	Oversight to get the facts.
	And I believe that we have started getting some facts.
	A whole lot more work to be done, but...
	We're going in that direction.
	We do have a lot of questions for the Secret Service or local law enforcement.
	And as Mr. Ivey said, the locals didn't get a lot of notice when it came to this campaign event for a presidential candidate.
	We need to do better.
	The American public is...
	Relying on us to get some answers.
	They want to make sure that we're doing the best we can to guard our democracy by guarding our candidates to office.
	As we get closer to the November election, like you both have said, we've got to watch the rhetoric.
	We've got to tone it down.
	And I've heard those words from this committee right after January 6th.
	We echoed those same words from both sides.
	Tone it down, folks.
	Tone it down, but don't let Hitler in the White House.
	Tone it down, but...
	We can do better.
	We can do better for this country, for democracy.
	We need to again set an example for the rest of the world.
	All of us together.
	We can do this.
	Oh, shut up!
	Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I yield.
	Start by doing your jobs, first of all.
	Thank you, gentlemen, and I'm going to give the chairman's closing statement for him, but it's prepared here, and I think that is the appropriate way to end.
	Before I do that, I want to say thank you to the witnesses, especially Colonel Paris Hugh.
	I will say that the North Carolina Highway Patrol is...
	As an institution in my state that I have not, until I had occasion, to serve in the legislature and then subsequently run for Congress and serve districts that have constantly changed in North Carolina.
	And I have seen institutionally how the State Highway Patrol has then fed the sheriff's offices over the course of time with the elected sheriffs who've come up in that institution.
	And I don't know that much about your organization, but you remind me of the fine.
	I really do appreciate your candor.
	Tomorrow, the director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, will be testifying before the Judiciary Committee, on which I also serve.
	And I hope he'll be candid.
	I believe there are moments when the sanctity of criminal investigations needs to be tempered by the fact that the nation Needs answers to a national security crisis, as I suggested before.
	You have been candid while still protecting the sanctity of the investigations that are ongoing, of which your agency is a part, and I appreciate that very much.
	Statements. During this hearing, we got the news that Director Cheadle resigned.
	After refusing to give straightforward answers to Congress and the American people about the Secret Service's failures on July 13, seeing the chairman return, I'm going to pause and let him give his statement, which I had commenced.
	Oh, my goodness, this is mildly painful.
	All right, how far behind am I here?
	However necessary as it was, Director Cheadle's disputably overdue resignation is only the first step on the path to accountability and reform.
	Today's hearing was a vital step in obtaining more information about what happened in Butler, Pennsylvania, but Congress has a lot of work ahead of us.
	I think today, as we've questioned these professionals who've served their communities and their states for their lifetime, We've discovered a lot of facts, particularly about the operation.
	You know, yesterday when we were on the site, we learned about the planning failures.
	Today, we've learned about conducts of the operation failures, communication.
	None of these were failures.
	These were all deliberate intended.
	The outcome just didn't happen.
	Secret Service making a decision to not stop the president.
	When a guy's using a rangefinder and is described as suspicious-looking, boggles the mind.
	We're going to continue to investigate the failures of the Secret Service.
	Our mission is very clear.
	We've got to get to the bottom of it.
	This can never, ever happen again.
	I want to thank both of you for serving.
	And for a very long testimony today, thanks for sticking around and letting us.
	We're going to have lots of other people come in here, and we're going to get granular on all of this stuff.
	But this is the closest that anyone's come to taking the life of a president or a presidential candidate in over four decades.
	It can never happen again.
	It should never have happened in the first place.
	We're going to continue our fact-finding to figure out exactly how it happened, much like an after-action review would.
	Identify all those areas and ensure that Secret Service, whomever steps up to take that leadership role now, does so and addresses these things.
	They've learned a very valuable lesson.
	You need to secure rooftops, people.
	Again, thank you, gentlemen, for being here.
	And if there are members, what often happens in our committee hearing, they'll have questions that come to them.
	They have a few days to generate written questions.
	Would you be open to us sending those to you and you just send a letter back with the answers in writing?
	Absolutely not, sir.
	Don't you dare ever email me again.
	Thank you.
	I appreciate the affirmative nods.
	Again, thanks for being here.
	And I think both sides of the aisle did an amazing job.
	Wrap it up.
	Made some closing comments.
	Mr. Craig, did you get a chance to?
	Okay. I'm sorry I missed them.
	I'm sure they were.
	I'll go watch the tape.
	The committee stands adjourned.
	All right.
	Excellent. Let's see if we catch any hot mics as they leave.
	That wraps it up.
	We're going to get to some analysis, commentary, read the Crumble Rants super chats.
	Let's see if there's any hot mic.
	No, they muted the mics unlike yesterday when they said, and that's what you call a smackdown.
	Maybe we'll hear something good here.
	Guy on the left kind of looks like the military guy out of Mars Attacks.
	Okay. Well, they were thanked for their service.
	That is for darn sure.
	Hold on.
	Let me put this on pause here.
	So that's that.
	Day two, and they're going to have Christopher Wray tomorrow for the FBI.
	I don't know if I'll be able to stream that.
	But I'll certainly be following it from wherever I am.
	I think I'm going to be going live with Michael Jan again tomorrow, so we'll see about that.
	And then Thursday, maybe with Chris Martinson talking about his theory about this.
	All right, we're going to take that, put it in the backdrop.
	Everybody, before we get into some of the analysis, let me see if I'm going to do this again here.
	I'm using Rumble Studio, and I want to show everybody how amazing Rumble Studio is for advertising for content creators.
	Checky, checky, get your phones out because you're going to see something on the side that you're going to want to scan that QR code.
	Do you rely on big, woke corporations and the corrupt medical establishment to keep you healthy?
	I hope not.
	Then why would you trust the same globally-owned corporations to keep your pet healthy?
	It's time we stop relying on them for anything.
	They hate us, they want us sick, and they want our pets sick, and they want our money.
	We at Rumble started positive.
	For those who are listening on podcast, P-A-W-S-I-T-I-V-E, health, because pets are an extension of our family and it matters if they get the clean, nutrient-filled, vitamin-rich superfoods to stay healthy and happy.
	That's why we created a range of superfood supplement waffles that your pet will love, packed with natural, healthy ingredients that promote better digestive support, bone health, vision, that won't be good for my dog, and immune strength.
	They're also rich in anti-inflammatories, vitamins, and minerals essential for your furry family members.
	So head over to Positive.com.
	P-A-S-I-T-I-V-E.
	Positive, spelled with a paw.com.
	Right now, check out the superfoods and other products.
	If you scan the barcode there, it'll take you right over there.
	Use the code STUDIO.
	Go there now, everybody.
	Show them how awesome this translates into actual foot traffic or digital foot traffic.
	Go there.
	Positive.com.
	Use the code STUDIO so they know from where you came and you will get 15% off your first subscription order.
	Positive.com.
	Get up here.
	And for anyone who didn't understand the it won't help my dog's eyes problem, look into Winston's eyes.
	I don't know if everybody knows this.
	There you go, right there.
	Winston is blind.
	So you can see the little white thing.
	Let's see the other eye here.
	Winston is blind and Pudge is paralyzed.
	So between both of my special needs dogs, we've got one functional dog, but I take very, very good care of them.
	So much so that the paralyzed one, Pudge, seems to be getting younger with every day that she gets older.
	All right.
	Positive.com, promo code STUDIO for 15% off your first subscription.
	Bada bing, bada boom.
	Use the barcode and you're going to see it there for the rest of the stream.
	Let's get to some of the Rumble, France, because there's been quite a bit, and I recognized a few of them, and there's some good stuff in there.
	Jason of the Greater Area.
	Jason of TGA.
	Any minute these politicians will realize they are disposable, just like they think the man they attempted to get assassinated is to them.
	Let me read that again.
	Any minute these politicians will realize they are disposable, just like they think the man they attempted to get assassinated is to them.
	That's where I think, I don't think AOC was in on this.
	I just think, you know, AOC all of a sudden starts getting sensitive to this when they realize it could have been any one of them on the stage that day set up.
	To get killed in broad daylight on national live stream HD television at one eight thousandth of a frame per second, 30 frames per second of the photographer who caught the bullet zipping by Trump's head.
	Reality of life says it's not, it's not time to do a sales pitch to make it look like there was a screw up.
	Let me see this.
	It's not time to do a sales pitch to make it look like their screw up.
	Was not off the chart.
	This fat prick is a joke.
	Well, I don't think it was his screw-up.
	I think he's highlighting the fact that Pennsylvania's PSP, Pennsylvania State Police, and I think his point is Pennsylvania did what they were supposed to do.
	It's Secret Service that's supposed to protect the president, protect their asset, their subject.
	Nifrandil says, Viva, can you look up and explain to us later what the F is going on with the executive powers delegation to the State Department signed by Biden this morning?
	Seems to be building concern.
	I've seen it, and I've got to tell you, I don't understand the full scope, scale, and tenor of what's going on.
	Sure as sugar, we'll be talking about that Sunday, but I'll try to make sense of it before then.
	Although I would suggest that bourbon with Barnes will probably address it.
	And I'm going to pick Bourbon with Barnes' big brain so that I can the next day pretend that I'm smarter than I actually am.
	Reality, although I guess what makes me smart is listening to people who are smart.
	Reality of life says we the people, to our government does not matter if we ever get the truth.
	Right or left or in the middle, race, color, or creed, this will be another JFK bullshit story.
	Now, you know, it won't be like JFK because there are too many cameras, there's too much independent knowledge, there's too much, you know, autistic...
	4chan deriving the truth.
	So they're not going to get away with it like they could have back in the JFK area.
	You can't hide the Saputo film for 15 years.
	We will get the truth in this.
	We might not get accountability, but we'll get the truth.
	And God willing, there will be whistleblowers and leakers who are going to come out of hiding and say, for whatever exposure this is going to place me in, it's time that we start bringing this to the national spotlight.
	And as I say, you know, they say the big fish gets that way by not getting caught.
	The big fish also makes sure it doesn't get caught by making sure the ecosystem depends on it.
	So there is a way for these leakers to create an ecosystem in which they are assets and not liabilities in order to protect themselves.
	Jason of the TGA, applied mass incompetence is still a conspiracy, actual, and definitely not a theory.
	Everybody knows what happened here.
	I think there's suspicion it's a prop house, says Maggie Rose 1521.
	Andy Pearson says, S.J.L.
	What does that stand for?
	Used pet names for her staff.
	Oh, Sheila Jackson Lee.
	Yeah, yeah, no.
	I'm not going to speak ill of the dead.
	It was the woman who had that leaked recording where she was verbally abusing a staffer.
	That's not to say she deserved to die for that, and we should not all be judged by our worst moment caught on camera.
	But from what I understand, Laura Loomer, in all of her awfulness, I would not have written the tweet that she wrote.
	But I understand who they're talking about.
	Yeah, Sheila Jackson Lee was the one who was caught on a mic berating and verbally abusing a staffer.
	And I think, if I'm not mistaken, one of the staffers might have self-harmed under her employment.
	Lucy the dog, you see that those in the government who allowed someone to shoot President Trump are now trying to be the ones who will solve the problem.
	But it's a total sham.
	I agree with you.
	Then we got King of Biltong.
	Good morning.
	I guess it's good afternoon now.
	Oh, it was good morning for you in Texas.
	Good morning from Anton's Meat and Eat.
	Free shipping for your Biltong using code Viva on www.biltongusa.com or www.antonusa.com.
	Use code Viva for 10% off of your order if your order already qualifies for free shipping.
	Viva10 for 10% off if your order already qualifies for free shipping.
	Okay, I got it.
	All right, I think we got all of those.
	Any minute politics.
	Okay, we got that part.
	Now, let's back this up and let's go over to vivabarneslaw.locals.com where I know we've got some tip questions.
	Thank you, Viva, for listening to all of that for us.
	Yeah, I'm not even going to do the same summary that I did yesterday because I don't think we had really good substantive admissions or really disgusting video on this one.
	Yesterday was a nauseating thing to listen to and I...
	Did the one-hour recap and then the vlog recap, which is, let me see, performing.
	How do I measure performance here?
	Yeah. Oh, wait.
	Why is it stuck at 91,000 views?
	89,000 views.
	Well, everybody can go check that one out.
	Boopsie, thank you.
	Then we got Judy Hodgkins, three bucks, says, who is the congressman that said he's hearing from constituents that it was a deliberate setup?
	I don't know who that was.
	He said not only a deliberate setup, but that there was more than one shooter.
	I've heard more than one shooter argument.
	As far as I'm concerned, that would just add another layer to the let it happen on purpose or made it happen on purpose.
	But it's a freaking setup.
	You don't need anybody to tell you it's a setup.
	People on Twitter are like, Viva, due process.
	Don't call for the criminal prosecution and jailing of Don Cheadle there.
	No, not Don Cheadle.
	That's an actor.
	Kim Cheadle.
	I'm like, her due process was the interviews that she gave to CBS or ABC.
	Her due process was her testimony yesterday.
	She confirmed that this was a deliberate setup.
	A deliberate setup through passive, deliberate, overt negligence.
	Let it happen.
	And I even say this is a made it happen on purpose because when you can stop someone from killing somebody and you don't, you're complicit.
	Criminally complicit.
	Not as a Good Samaritan perspective, but as a law enforcement or secret service protection.
	You had one job and you failed at every freaking aspect, change of venue, not securing it properly, not securing obvious.
	There was no, there was no, they need more resources.
	There was no, we learned something from this.
	They didn't do what they knew they had to do at all levels of this catastrophic made it happen on purpose.
	Entry required says mental health.
	I have watched the decline of mental health over the past four decades, and I am now also aware of its decline over the preceding decades that I wasn't aware of at the time.
	Houston, we have a problem, says Mr. Entry Required.
	I agree with you.
	Blue CW Soldier says that's Dallas Alexander's response to the assassination attempt.
	Oh, and that's above me.
	Well, let's see what this is here.
	See, I'm not...
	Here, let's see what this is.
	Let me bring it up.
	I haven't seen...
	Couldn't listen to four things at one time earlier, but let's see.
	What's going on here?
	Oh, my opinion.
	I am talking about the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.
	And I know everyone's going to have some crazy opinion.
	Everyone's going to have a different opinion.
	It's going to be very wild for the next little while, but just if you don't know me or are new to this page, I spent about 17 years in the military, 14 of which, just about 14 of which were at Tier 1 Special Operations Unit called JTF2.
	Our sniper team has the world record for the longest confirmed sniper kill.
	And a huge part of our job while I was there and while I was a sniper was doing close protection for VIPs up to and including the Prime Minister when he would go to, you know, dangerous countries like Iraq or Afghanistan.
	We would be in charge of that security.
	So I'm very familiar with...
	The layout of these types of things and what the jobs should be.
	I think I know what he's going to say.
	And yesterday, what happened, I have no doubts in my mind that the shooter had help from somewhere within an agency, an organization, or the government.
	The second I saw that aerial photo of what they were saying happened, It immediately made no sense to me.
	You cannot, in broad daylight, get onto a rooftop within, it looked like, maybe a couple hundred yards.
	If that, you can't get into that position with a gun.
	When there's a president speaking, it cannot be done.
	You don't even need to be a sniper to know that it's the most fucking obvious thing and obvious place in the whole world.
	You could be a 7th grader.
	What do we need to do for security here?
	Well, let's look at these rooftops that are almost within zero-ring range of a rifle.
	Something happened.
	I'm not pointing fingers at anyone.
	It's too obvious that this guy had helped get in there.
	Whether it's someone turned a blind eye or it was strategically planned, it had to be planned to a certain level because Events like that and security like that, it's not a small thing.
	And that is the most obvious place to be.
	On top of that, I find it very strange that, you know, if the story that comes out is like, oh yeah, he snuck into position and he got set up and nobody saw him.
	It was an oversight and security and overwatch and we just made a mistake.
	Sorry. I think it's also very weird that if that's the case and someone is good enough to stalk.
	Within 150-200 yards of one of the hardest to stock targets in the whole world, you're not going to miss a shot.
	You're not going to miss that shot.
	If you have the skill set to get in there, avoiding all of these security, all different layers of security, then you will have the skill set to hit that first round.
	It just doesn't make any sense.
	So my opinion is...
	And whether this comes out now or way later, this guy had help from somewhere.
	And he was a useless...
	I mean, it's obviously concerning.
	It's going to be wild.
	I think it's all you're going to see for the next little while.
	Anyway, just because I keep getting asked, that's my two cents.
	Have a good day, everybody.
	Okay. Interesting.
	I concur.
	What we're going to go for, let me finish up here in vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
	What the F do they keep saying poor standards of two-way communication like very effing LEO, like every effing LEO emergency state and federal don't have radios as if equipment was the platform and not the deliberate failure to allow for this to attempt to happen on Trump.
	Yep. We're going to all discussion.
	Piran54 says, you mean a loner with a cheap rifle evaded security and shot the president from an elevated position and then was killed before he could be questioned?
	Anyone around 1963 could tell you this was a planned hit.
	Abso-freaking-lutely.
	How many SS agents were just following orders?
	I don't know if that's Secret Service or the SS, as in the Nazi secret police.
	Who was that from?
	That was from Militiaman2k.
	Then we got Piran.
	Director Cheeto failed and the Dems don't tolerate failure, so she had to go.
	This is why the Dems' questions were so tough in the hearing.
	Holy crap, that is old vid AJ already interviewed one day ago.
	I'm not sure what we're talking about there.
	Money is too tight to mention.
	Fixed income, old people, white hair.
	It says Mr. Entry required.
	Yeah, the Biden inflation, just inflation.
	Piran. 54 says, Biden couldn't beat Trump, so they tried to kill him.
	When that failed, they had to get rid of losing Biden and replace him.
	The war now is between Obama and Clinton.
	Harris is the Clinton surrogate.
	Notice Obama did not endorse her.
	I mean, I still am sticking with my prediction, but it's looking less and less likely that it's not going to be Kamala Harris as the presidential candidate for the Democrats.
	I mean, she cannot be.
	I mean, she just can't be.
	I don't care the media push that we see from...
	Kim, what is his name?
	Chong? What's his name?
	The guy, I'll allow it.
	I hate these.
	Kim, what's his name?
	Hold on a second.
	I hate these celebrities are endorsing them and now celebrities that I found funny are desecrating their image and their memory to me.
	Ken Jeong.
	You might remember him from such classics as Hangover 1, 2, and 3 and that show that I've never seen.
	So this media push to jam Kamala down the throats of the electorate.
	I don't see it working.
	It's going to wear off.
	And then people are going to realize she cannot win.
	And so what's going to happen?
	Anyone in the chat, you think it's going to be Kamala that's going to be the presidential candidate for the Democrats?
	I still bet no.
	But I don't know if I'm just stubbornly sticking to my own initial prediction and I'm not reassessing in light of new information.
	Let me see.
	I'm going to go to the...
	I'm not reading that, Peter.
	Okay. So what else is there?
	Viva celebrities are crap under glitter.
	Yes, for sure.
	Viva Canadian.
	He is a Gladio.
	What is Gladio?
	What is Gladio?
	I don't know what this is.
	That comes from PB John.
	PB John.
	The Rock says PB John.
	Hillary will be assigned.
	Well, I got Hillary or...
	Hillary or Kamala?
	The interesting thing is that in the markets, even though Kamala's at 91 cents now, Hillary and Obama, yeah, Hillary and Clinton and Obama, or Hillary and Michelle, are the only two stock who hasn't dropped to one penny yet because they haven't formally endorsed.
	Hillary, I thought, did.
	But there's still a question there.
	But it just, it can't be.
	It can't be from a question of losing the election.
	It cannot be Kamala, period.
	Would I see Kamala?
	Like winning the swing states, Wisconsin and Georgia?
	I don't think so.
	But again, ich bin nicht.
	A man who, you know, I understand the limitations of my own knowledge.
	All of Andrew Tate's course got leaked.
	I think that's a...
	Oh man, so there's a bunch of spam going on in Rumble.
	That's fine.
	Viva is not Gladio.
	What is Gladio?
	I gotta go look up what Gladio is.
	Gladio. Operation Gladio was the codename for clandestine stay-behind operations of armed resistance that were organized by the Western Union, and subsequently by NATO and by the CIA in collaboration with several...
	Hold on, what the hell is Operation Gladio?
	Okay, now if it's Operation Gladio.
	Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to find out if Viva Frye is Operation Gladio.
	Is that a step up or a step down from Mossad?
	Because I get both of those periodically.
	Okay. This article is about a military operation.
	Operation Gladio is a codename for stay-behind operations.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	Gladio specifically refers to the Italian branch of NATO stay-behind organizations.
	It's used as an informal name for all of them.
	Stay-behind operations were prepared in many NATO...
	According to several Western European researchers, the operation involved the use of assassination, psychological warfare.
	What the heck do I have to do with this?
	I don't even understand it.
	How I could be part of this.
	Am I a useful tool, or am I a perpetrator of Operation Gladio, or am I actually just misunderstanding what the heck is going on?
	What time is it?
	257? Oh, God, Mr. Mike, you have to put...
	There's a funny picture of me in there.
	You have been promoted, says TRLadyLadite.
	All right.
	What do we got here?
	Let's see what we got.
	I think I can bring this one up here.
	Come on.
	Stop scrolling, chat.
	Killary wouldn't be surprised her last chance.
	To try to take Trump out.
	Okay. Stay behind military.
	I don't know what that means!
	I'm going to go ask somebody what that means.
	I don't trust Wikipedia doctor offensive, but for certain things like defining what Operation Gladio is, Operation Gladio or army left behind if Russians are coming back.
	Is it a good thing to be Gladio or a bad thing?
	Just chat.
	Good or bad?
	To be accused of being Operation Gladio.
	If it's stay behind and fight, that kind of sounds cool and good.
	So maybe it's a compliment and not an insult.
	Viva Fry Barnes did a hush-hush on Gladio.
	If my memory hasn't failed me, Mr. Mike, Mr. Mike says in our Locals community, I will check it out.
	Viva Fry Bongino talked about the third shooter, says it was a state sniper who missed the assassin.
	That's what I was thinking.
	In which case, we're going to see bullet holes on the end location, so it's bad.
	Okay, well, then I'm not Gladio because I'm good.
	I'm a good boy.
	My grandmother said I was cool and handsome.
	All right, we're going to end it.
	I'm going to get off my butt.
	I'm going to go get a natural or unnatural energy drink.
	I'm going to go parent, walk a dog, squeeze a dog's urine, squeeze pudgy pudgy, parallels pudgy, and get that urine flowing.
	Look at this.
	Listen. Oh, yeah.
	You hear that elbow crack?
	What else can I do?
	My back?
	Oh, that didn't work.
	Nothing happened.
	I think I just pulled a muscle.
	Let me make sure that I didn't miss anything while we're on it.
	Killary wouldn't be surprised.
	Okay, fine.
	And we got everything in our Locals community.
	Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for being here.
	I'll see if I can stream it tomorrow.
	I'm not sure if I can, but...
	Oh, here we go.
	Okay, hold on a second.
	Here, here, pin, pin.
	Are we done?
	You're not Operation Gladio.
	I made a facetious remark related to Canada.
	Trudeau probably...
	Okay, fine.
	Good. Don't worry about it.
	I'm not sensitive anyhow, nor do I take it personally.
	Go! Enjoy the day.
	I'm going to go exercise.
	I've got to walk the dogs.
	Excellent show, as usual.
	Says Twine 9 Theory.
	Yeah, I have trouble staying quiet, but we all watched it.
	We got through together.
	We understand what's going on.
	Yesterday was bombshell after bombshell, embarrassment after embarrassment.
	What's her face?
	Kim Cheadle resigned.
	In disgrace, may she be charged right now.
	Maybe we find out who else is responsible for this me-hop of an assassination attempt on Donald Trump.
	Godspeed, people.
	Stay safe.
	Stay peaceful.
	Do not give in to the temptation of the provocation of these narcissistic psychopaths who are trying to rub our misery in our face, rub their power in our face to provoke a response.
	Don't do it.
	Fight with knowledge and changing the tide of public opinion.
	Make free speech great again and make free thought great again.
	Go and enjoy the day.
	I shall see you all tomorrow.

▲