WASHINGTON — An independent panel investigating the failed assassination attempt on Donald Trump during a Pennsylvania campaign event criticized the Secret Service for inadequate communication on the day of the incident, as well as its inability to secure the location from where the assailant fired shots. The investigation uncovered broader systemic failures within the agency, including an insufficient grasp of the distinct threats posed to Trump and a prevailing attitude of operating with limited resources.
The 52-page report made public on Thursday held the Secret Service accountable for specific lapses leading up to the rally in Butler on July 13, as well as highlighting intrinsic cultural issues at the agency. The panel recommended that new leadership be appointed from outside the agency to concentrate on enhancing their protective responsibilities.
“For the Secret Service to fulfill its essential mission, fundamental reform is essential,” the authors communicated in a letter to Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas of the Homeland Security Department, which oversees the Secret Service. “Without these necessary reforms, the independent review panel foresees the possibility of another situation like Butler occurring.”
The rally resulted in the death of one attendee and injuries to two others when the shooter, Thomas Michael Crooks, ascended a nearby building and opened fire as Trump was speaking. The former president was grazed on the ear before Secret Service agents swiftly evacuated him from the stage. This incident, alongside another in Florida — where a gunman failed to target Trump while he was golfing, without firing a shot — has led to a significant decline in confidence in the agency.
The conclusions drawn in the report come from a panel comprised of four former law enforcement officials from various levels of government, following previous investigations conducted by congressional members, the Secret Service’s own review team, and the oversight body from Homeland Security.
Key findings and recommendations from the report include issues surrounding communication and security planning. The panel reiterated prior conclusions regarding the inadequacy of safeguarding the nearby buildings that had a clear shot at the venue where Trump delivered his speech, as well as the significant communication breakdowns that prevented effective collaboration among the Secret Service and local law enforcement agencies.
“The failure to secure a complex of buildings located only about 130 yards from the protectee, which posed serious high-angle line of sight threats, constitutes a critical lapse in security,” the report stated.
The panel also criticized the planning collaboration between the Secret Service and local authorities, emphasizing that the Secret Service did not inquire about the security measures in place at the building. The attitude of relying on a vague understanding that local law enforcement had the situation under control was deemed by the panel as insufficient, asserting that it contributed to the breakdown in security during the Butler rally.
Additional challenges included the existence of two separate command posts at the event — one for local law enforcement and another for Secret Service agents — resulting in a significant disruption in communication flow.
Moreover, during the rally, the Secret Service had to utilize different radio channels due to interference from conversations of agents protecting First Lady Jill Biden at a separate event in Pittsburgh. The panel found that ground law enforcement officials communicated through a chaotic mixture of radio, text, email, and cell phone methods throughout the day, which added to the confusion.
The report also highlighted a lack of clarity regarding who held ultimate authority on the day of the event.
Turning to the cultural challenges within the agency, the panel revealed a concerning aspect regarding how the Secret Service approached its mission, particularly in safeguarding Trump. The findings suggested that personnel operated under the impression they had to manage with decreased resources. The report specified that additional measures taken to secure Trump following the Butler incident should have been proactively implemented beforehand.
“The panel did not conclude that there was any malicious intent behind these issues but indicated an over-reliance on categorizing personnel based on their status (former, candidate, nominee), rather than assessing risk on an individual basis,” it noted.
Furthermore, the panel pointed to a “lack of ownership” among senior staff who were present at the rally, illustrating the shortcomings of a senior agent responsible for communications who did not conduct a walkthrough of the site before the event began or brief local police about communication strategies.
Inexperience among specific agents assigned for the July 13 rally was also cited, particularly a site agent who graduated from the Secret Service academy in 2020 and had only recently joined Trump’s detail. This agent had conducted minimal preparatory work prior to the Butler event. Another agent tasked with operating a drone detection system had limited previous experience with the technology.
The panel’s recommendations emphasize the need for a centralized command post at large events, ensuring that representatives of the Secret Service and local authorities are all staffed in the same location; implementing overhead surveillance for outdoor gatherings; developing security plans capable of mitigating sight-line risks up to 1,000 yards; designating a clear leader for events; and enhancing training to improve emergency evacuations for protectees.
Moreover, the panel voiced the necessity for new external leadership within the agency and a renewed dedication to protecting individuals under its care while expressing doubts about the viability of continuing investigations it also conducts, such as those related to financial crimes.
“The paramount focus of the agency must center around its protective responsibilities, especially given the current suboptimal state of these functions,” emphasized the report.
The members of the panel included Mark Filip, who served as deputy attorney general under George W. Bush; David Mitchell, who has a history of various law enforcement roles in Maryland and Delaware; Janet Napolitano, who served as homeland security secretary under Barack Obama; and Frances Fragos Townsend, the assistant for homeland security and counterterrorism during Bush’s presidency.
The 52-page report made public on Thursday held the Secret Service accountable for specific lapses leading up to the rally in Butler on July 13, as well as highlighting intrinsic cultural issues at the agency. The panel recommended that new leadership be appointed from outside the agency to concentrate on enhancing their protective responsibilities.
“For the Secret Service to fulfill its essential mission, fundamental reform is essential,” the authors communicated in a letter to Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas of the Homeland Security Department, which oversees the Secret Service. “Without these necessary reforms, the independent review panel foresees the possibility of another situation like Butler occurring.”
The rally resulted in the death of one attendee and injuries to two others when the shooter, Thomas Michael Crooks, ascended a nearby building and opened fire as Trump was speaking. The former president was grazed on the ear before Secret Service agents swiftly evacuated him from the stage. This incident, alongside another in Florida — where a gunman failed to target Trump while he was golfing, without firing a shot — has led to a significant decline in confidence in the agency.
The conclusions drawn in the report come from a panel comprised of four former law enforcement officials from various levels of government, following previous investigations conducted by congressional members, the Secret Service’s own review team, and the oversight body from Homeland Security.
Key findings and recommendations from the report include issues surrounding communication and security planning. The panel reiterated prior conclusions regarding the inadequacy of safeguarding the nearby buildings that had a clear shot at the venue where Trump delivered his speech, as well as the significant communication breakdowns that prevented effective collaboration among the Secret Service and local law enforcement agencies.
“The failure to secure a complex of buildings located only about 130 yards from the protectee, which posed serious high-angle line of sight threats, constitutes a critical lapse in security,” the report stated.
The panel also criticized the planning collaboration between the Secret Service and local authorities, emphasizing that the Secret Service did not inquire about the security measures in place at the building. The attitude of relying on a vague understanding that local law enforcement had the situation under control was deemed by the panel as insufficient, asserting that it contributed to the breakdown in security during the Butler rally.
Additional challenges included the existence of two separate command posts at the event — one for local law enforcement and another for Secret Service agents — resulting in a significant disruption in communication flow.
Moreover, during the rally, the Secret Service had to utilize different radio channels due to interference from conversations of agents protecting First Lady Jill Biden at a separate event in Pittsburgh. The panel found that ground law enforcement officials communicated through a chaotic mixture of radio, text, email, and cell phone methods throughout the day, which added to the confusion.
The report also highlighted a lack of clarity regarding who held ultimate authority on the day of the event.
Turning to the cultural challenges within the agency, the panel revealed a concerning aspect regarding how the Secret Service approached its mission, particularly in safeguarding Trump. The findings suggested that personnel operated under the impression they had to manage with decreased resources. The report specified that additional measures taken to secure Trump following the Butler incident should have been proactively implemented beforehand.
“The panel did not conclude that there was any malicious intent behind these issues but indicated an over-reliance on categorizing personnel based on their status (former, candidate, nominee), rather than assessing risk on an individual basis,” it noted.
Furthermore, the panel pointed to a “lack of ownership” among senior staff who were present at the rally, illustrating the shortcomings of a senior agent responsible for communications who did not conduct a walkthrough of the site before the event began or brief local police about communication strategies.
Inexperience among specific agents assigned for the July 13 rally was also cited, particularly a site agent who graduated from the Secret Service academy in 2020 and had only recently joined Trump’s detail. This agent had conducted minimal preparatory work prior to the Butler event. Another agent tasked with operating a drone detection system had limited previous experience with the technology.
The panel’s recommendations emphasize the need for a centralized command post at large events, ensuring that representatives of the Secret Service and local authorities are all staffed in the same location; implementing overhead surveillance for outdoor gatherings; developing security plans capable of mitigating sight-line risks up to 1,000 yards; designating a clear leader for events; and enhancing training to improve emergency evacuations for protectees.
Moreover, the panel voiced the necessity for new external leadership within the agency and a renewed dedication to protecting individuals under its care while expressing doubts about the viability of continuing investigations it also conducts, such as those related to financial crimes.
“The paramount focus of the agency must center around its protective responsibilities, especially given the current suboptimal state of these functions,” emphasized the report.
The members of the panel included Mark Filip, who served as deputy attorney general under George W. Bush; David Mitchell, who has a history of various law enforcement roles in Maryland and Delaware; Janet Napolitano, who served as homeland security secretary under Barack Obama; and Frances Fragos Townsend, the assistant for homeland security and counterterrorism during Bush’s presidency.