approximately. in order to meet future and emerging needs. >> doctor foxx from north carolina. >> what gave would you give the secret service's performance in butler, pennsylvania on july 13th? >> as i've stated, ma'am, this was clearly a failure. i would grade the agents and officers who selflessly threw themselves in front of the president and neutralized the threat an a. i think we need to examine the events that led up to and prior to that day. >> you stated in 2021 that the secret service has a 0 fail mission. it is clear the events of july 13th show a cascade of failures that caused corey comperatore his life. nearly cost the former president

his life and injured two other men. when an agency fails spectacular in its mission those responsible must be held accountable and the problems must be fixed so they cannot happen again. why should the american people or the officials you are responsible for protecting have confidence in your ability to lead the secret service after such a spectacular failure? >> i appreciate the question and i am committed to finding answers so that we can make the agency stronger after this. >> you said on july 15th that the buck stops with me. how are you taking accountability for the secret services failures during the july 13th assassination attempt on president trump? >> i have taken accountability and i will continue to take accountability. i am responsible for leading the agency and responsible for finding the answers to how this event occurred and making sure that it doesn't happen again.

>> so i would like to explore how you got the job as director of the united states secret service. is it typical for the director of the secret service to be recommended for the role at the behest of a president's family and senior staff perhaps at the joe biden? >> i spent 27 years in an agency with a mission that i absolutely love. i started my career in detroit. i worked my way up through investigations and protection. >> was there competition for the position? >> you would have to ask those who were involved in the interview process. >> but you think you are the best person in the country to head the secret service? >> i think that i am the best person to lead the secret service at this time. >> the secret service receives

billions in funding each year as has been explained by my colleagues here. in fact, you've had an increase in real terms of 55%. as you are no doubt aware, staffing levels for those to protect senior officials has decreased by about 350 between 2014 and today. clearly a lack of financial resources is not to blame for the staffing shortage. in 2022, the secret service saw nearly half its workforce leave in one year during the same year it was ranked dead last among law enforcement agencies in the best places to work in the federal government. can you explain why your agency was so poorly rated and why so many staff left in just one year? >> with all due respect, i dispute the statistic of half of the employees leaving in 2022.

i think that has been inaccurate data that has been reported out there. what i can tell you is as i have returned as the director of the agency we have had an increase in hiring and staffing and an increase in resources and we are committed to continue to hire so that we can be staffed appropriately to meet the dynamic mission that we have. >> well, you may want to dispute it but it is out there. my understanding -- given the high profile failures and rotten culture at the secret service during your nearly two-year tenure, why should the american people have any confidence in your ability to lead the secret service to perform its 0 fail mission to protect our senior leaders? >> the secret service has an incredible culture. our men and women place service over self. they come in every day willing to risk their lives for our protective mission and they work

investigations that thwart people who would do harm to children, child exploiters. we have an incredible mission and our culture is we'll get the job done no matter what. >> those on the front lines have a great culture and were willing to risk their lives for president trump. but i'm not sure the leadership at the agency has the right kind of culture. i yield back. >> chair recognizes mr. connolly from virginia. >> well, i hope the american people do appreciate the incredible daily risks secret service agents take on our behalf. you mentioned there are 36 regular clients you have that you protect constantly. but i was participating in the nato summit two weeks ago. we had 32 heads of government and heads of state plus visiting heads of states and heads of

government. presumably you provided protection for all of them. >> that's correct. >> just saying. help us understand, however, i will stipulate that there is an ongoing investigation that you divinity want to go into too much detail on that as you've been able to ascertain the facts and analyze what they mean. you can understand, however, the anxiety we and the american public have about how could this happen? and how can we insure it can't recur? there are some things my friends on one particular side of the aisle don't really want to talk about, like ar-15s and access to them by a 20-year-old or anybody, for that matter. presumably director cheatle, guns in america, semi automatic or assault weapons has helped

your job and the missions of your agencies and made it less complicated, isn't that true? >> i'm not understanding your question. >> simple. more guns, especially dangerous ones, have made your job protecting people easier, is that not right? >> i think from everything -- >> it's simple english. more guns, do they make your job more or less complicated in protecting these 36 clients and visiting heads of state and heads of government that come to washington? >> i think the secret service needs to take into account the -- >> i asked a simple question, which deserves a simple answer. the amount of guns, dangerous weapons in america like a.r.15s, has that made your job, the mission of the secret service, easier or more difficult? >> i think the threat

environment for protecting our secret service protectees is always difficult and that's dynamic and always evolving. >> we stipulate it's always difficult. this is a simple one. does the amount of guns make your job easier or more difficult today? >> i understand the second amendment rights of individuals. >> i didn't ask that question. i'm asking a simple analysis. i can tell you, you aren't making my job easier in terms of assessing your qualifications for continuing on as director. please answer the question. you are the head of the secret service and speaking on behalf of 8,000 members who put their lines on the line. we had a failure on your own admission. >> the job of the secret service is difficult on every day and we need to make sure that we are

mitigating all threats whether that be weapons >> that is not my question and now i think you are evading the answer, which is not a hard one. >> i am sorry that you feel that way, sir. >> how else could i feel, when you are clearly avoiding a direct answer to a very simple declarative question? we almost lost a presidential candidate the other day. a 20-year-old had access to his father's ar-15 and got on top of a roof within 500 yards or feet of the podium and i'm asking you did the availability of that ar-15, which is replicated across america, make your job harder or easier and you are not willing to answer that question and you think -- and you wonder why we might have a lack of confidence in your continued ability to direct this agency? >> i understand your question and that's the environment

>> why not answer it if you understand it. >> it is the environment the secret service works in every day. >> that doesn't tell me anything. that's the environment we work in. i had an attack on my office a year ago. i know about violence, too. they came to kill me. when he couldn't, he beat one of my staffers eight times with a baseball bat on the head. we live with the threat of violence. but a simple answer from the director of the secret service would be helpful and i'm sorry you have chosen to evade it. i yield back. >> thank you. when this guy took the shots, he climbed a ladder to get on the roof, correct? >> i'm unable to answer details of exactly how the individual accessed the roof at this time.

>> do you know when if he did use a ladder, do you know when the ladder placed there? two days before, the night before? do you have any information as to when the ladder got there? >> the f.b.i. is still conducting an investigation. i would like to answer those questions. >> how did the rifle get to the roof? >> again, sir, at this time i'm unable to answer questions to -- >> have they cleaned the roof since the assassination attempt? >> have they cleaned the roof? >> right, has anything been done to the roof? is it juts like it was ten days ago or not? has anything been done to the roof? >> i don't have an answer for that. >> okay. were president trump's normal agencies normally assigned to him there that day? >> yes. >> these were the same agents

that were always there? >> yes, sir, the people that are assigned to his detail were working on that day. >> okay. there is stuff on the internet says they were not there that day but these are the same agents who are routinely there? >> yes, sir. >> okay. do we know which agents fired the shots that finally took down the potential assassin? >> yes, sir, i do. >> could you give us those names or background of those agents? >> i would not offer their name up in this setting but it was one of our technical officers, our counter snipers. >> okay. can we privately get those names, the committee? >> i am certain that we can make names available privately. >> okay. do we know where all the shots landed? first of all, how many shots did the potential assassin, how many shots came out of the rifle? >> sir, again i would hesitate to offer that information as the

f.b.i. is conducting an investigation. >> have we got the bullets from all the shots? >> again, that would be the responsibility of the f.b.i. to collect that evidence. >> okay. do we have any -- do we have the correspondence from the shooter? has that been recovered from his phone, whatever? >> again, i would have to defer you to the f.b.i. for details on that investigation. >> okay. you spent some time trying to change the makeup of the secret service, okay? you feel there are too high a percentage are men. does this affect at all who you are hiring for the secret service? >> i've spent my time as the director trying to increase the number of people that we hire in

the secret service so that we have the best and the brightest and that's been my concentration as the director. >> you are hiring -- not hiring men because of your desire to hit certain targets? >> i am hiring the best qualified candidates that put in an application that want to work for our great organization. >> okay. next question. the shooter obtained a direct sight of president trump from the position on the rooftop. i assume that is not something that should ever happen. do you want to elaborate on how that happened or what you wish you had done differently or would do differently next time there is a trump rally? >> again, sir, the facts of this particular event are still

unfolding. nine days. there have been a number of reports out there. so i do not want to provide information that perhaps would contradict something that has been erroneously reported or is not factual. but there clearly was a mistake and we'll take every effort to make sure that this never happens again. >> could you elaborate why you want 1-third of the secret service to be women? >> i've never stated that i want 1/3 of the service to the women? >> you had some target. >> the gentleman yields. >> what was erroneously reported. you said something was erroneously reported. what are you referring to? the question was in the context of the shooter using a ladder to get on the building. what was erroneously reported? >> i'm saying that there have been a number of reports out

there that have been speculation and until we have the actual facts, i don't want to report anything that would contradict speculation that has been out there. >> thanks. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois. >> thank you for bringing us together this morning. one question i get asked a lot what can congress do to stop this from happening again? i would like to share a graphic from a recent study conducted by professor robert pape. a world renowned experts in combating political violence. 74% of americans want this congress to come together to denounce political violence of all stripes. you can tell it's across party lines. i commend the chair and ranking member for putting out the statement the other day condemning political violence and would like to ask my colleagues to join us in

introducing in condemning political violence and we'll circulate that resolution shortly. director cheatle, as you know, the shooter began shooting at 6:11:00 p.m. eastern on july 13th. nbc reported at 5:51 pm. 20 minutes before the shooting the state police informed the secret service of their concern. the rally was not paused at that point, correct? >> no. >> two minutes later at 5:53 p.m. secret service notified its snipers about the gunman. the rally wasn't paused at that point either, correct? >> no. >> let me show you some video footage by rally goers. play the video on the screen up here. this was taken two minutes

before the shooting started if you could turn up the volume. >> he is on the roof. he has a gun. right there. he is on the roof. he is getting up now. he is on the roof. >> ma'am, that doesn't look like suspicious behavior, that is threatening behavior to me. the rally wasn't paused at that point, either, correct? >> i can tell you as i stated earlier, sir, that the moment that the shift surrounding the president were aware of an actual threat. >> that's a threat right there. the guy is on the roof and everybody is yelling at him and directing the officers' attention to him. >> we are currently still combing through communications and when communications were passed. >> i can point you to this communication, two minutes before the shots started ringing out. was there ever a moment where

the secret service actually considered pausing the rally? >> the secret service would have paused the rally had they known or been known there was an actual threat. >> the answer is no, correct? >> i can speak to you in generalities. i don't know all of the communications. >> the answer is no, you did not consider pausing the rally, correct? >> the people that are in charge of protecting the president on that day would never bring the former president out if there was a threat that had been identified. >> they did because we have now identified three points in the 20 minutes before the shooting that the threat emerged. let me point you to something else. which is the building the shooter was perched on seen here. this building is called the agr building. i'm sure you are familiar with it. it is no more than 150 yards from the stage where donald trump stood. yet the security perimeter was

drawn such that the agr building was placed outside of it. director cheatle, according to the "washington post." the ar-15 rifle had a range of 400 to 600 yards and therefore the agr building was clearly within rifle range of the stage, correct? >> yes. >> nbc news reported in the days before the rally the secret service thought it required special attention, correct? >> that's reporting from nbc? >> yes. >> so i am still looking into an active investigation. >> it has been nine days. you should know that, right? and yet despite the fact that the agr building was in rifle range of the stage and it was flagged as a vulnerability, this building was put outside of the secret service's security perimeter. i respectfully submit the secret service must expand its security

perimeter to account for the kinds of weapons that can be used outside the perimeter to endanger the protectees inside the perimeter, ma'am. let me turn your attention to some conspiracy theories that have been circulating and ask you to comment on them. first you have not found evidence that the incident was a staged shooting, right? >> correct. >> you haven't found evidence that this was the result of a conspiracy of high ranking government officials correct? >> correct. >> not directed by a foreign state or entity. >> not at this time. >> thank you. i yield back. >> chair now recognizes mr. cloud from texas. >> i want to confirm there was only one counter sniper who took one shot? >> we had multiple counter sniper teams available. >> on the premises.

only one took one shot, correct? >> correct. >> how many spent shell casings were found on the roof? >> i would have to defer you to the f.b.i. >> word is the car was rigged with explosives. >> i would have to defer you to the f.b.i. investigation. >> okay. you aren't curious about -- you don't communicate with them? okay. cnn reported the secret service did not sweep the building to shooter used to shoot president trump and other attendees. is that true or false? >> it will depend on the information that we obtain from our investigations. >> okay. secret service knew there was a suspicious person anywhere from ain't minutes to 30 to 60 minutes. were president trump or his team notified of the threat? >> i think there is a difference between suspicious and threat.

we're going back and looking at communications to know when the information about a suspicious person was passed to secret service personnel. >> okay. but was president trump or his team notified? >> again we're going back and looking to make sure we have the exact information of when the notifications were made and who they were made to. >> i think it is troubling for a lot of us that the number one question everyone is america is wondering is why was the roof left open and after nine days we should at least maybe have a little bit of that information. when you come to this committee hearing and you don't have anything to say about that, it's very, very troubling. did you review the security plan for this event? >> i personally do not review security plans for events that take place across the country. >> any of them? >> we have a number of events

that take place. >> who is the top level official who reviews the security plans? >> there are a number of people that review security plans. >> who is responsible for signing off on a security plan? >> a conjunction of personnel. there are people on the ground, supervisors on the detail, people at headquarters. >> there is not one person it's good, we're going for it? >> much in the way we build our security plans they are multiple layers. >> amisn't there an individual o signs off on the plans? >> there are multiple layers. >> so there is no accountability? >> there is accountability, sir. the whether it's the f.b.i. or fauci or anything it is time after time after time these multiple layers of accountability turn into layers of plausible deniability. agencies after agency, that has to be fixed. you keep coming here and

expecting yes, you are saying i'm responsible but you are accountable for it but there is nothing. what do you mean by that? you are saying you will keep your job, right? >> i assure you, sir, if we determine through the course of our investigation that someone or people need to be held accountable, we'll do so. >> what level of -- if president biden, god forbid, had been shot and killed would you think that was worthy of resignation. >> i would want to make sure we are conducting an investigation, that there is continuity in that investigation, and that we could find the answers for what happened. >> you don't think the assassination of somebody under your detail is worthy of resignation? >> this event was tragic and deserves answers. >> you want to make sure this never happens again. everyone in america knows that

is not the job description you are tasked with but your job is to make sure it never happens period. one of your goals in the strategic plan is to champion diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility. you accomplished the accessibility part. what standards -- do you keep the same standards for all applicants? does every secret service agent meet the same qualifications or different standards for different people? >> everyone who moves through the application process has to meet the same standards to become a special agent. >> okay. the trouble i think we're having right now so far you gave a lame excuse for sloped roof. you said local law enforcement as job was to cover up the building before backtracking on that. we were told that president trump's team did not ask for security before you back tracked on that. you haven't provided the audio recording that this committee,

the chairman requested that was due thursday, you didn't give us advance copy of your opening statement, but yet there was reporting on it somewhere else. there seems to be more information from youtube videos than you are able to provide for us. it begs the question to anyone, you are in charge of the investigation of your own failure so how is anybody in america supposed to be able to trust the results of that investigation as being anything transparent and genuine? >> that's the last question. please feel free to answer the question. >> i have been a secret service agent for nearly 30 years and led with integrity and i follow our core values of duty, justice, honor, loyalty, and courage. and i am doing that in this case and i assure this committee i will provide answers when we have a full and complete report in addition to cooperating with all of the other investigations that are ongoing. >> chair now recognizes the

gentleman from california. >> i want to thank the chair and the ranking member for convening this hearing on a bipartisan basis. i join them in condemning the horrific assassination attempt on the former president. i am relieved for the sake of the country that he wasn't seriously hurt and that he survived and my thoughts are with him and his family during such a traumatic event and express condolences to corey comperatore's family and recognize his heroism in saving his daughters' lives and to the victims of that awful event. now director cheatle, would you agree that this is the most serious security lapse since president reagan was shot in 1981 of the secret service? >> yes, sir, i would. >> and, you know what stewart knight did when he was in charge

at the time of the secret service. do you know what he did afterwards? >> he remained on duty. >> he resigned. he resigned. stewart knight was not a democrat or republican appointee. look, i am not questioning your judgment. i just don't think this is partisan. if you have an assassination attempt on a president, a former president, or a candidate, you need to resign. that's what stewart knight d. he was a republican appointee and he took responsibility. you need to reflect. this is not a question of you. it is a question of the american people. you can't go leading a secret service agency when there is an assassination attempt on a presidential candidate. i would say that about anyone who is running. so i guess my question to you is what's the difference between your position and what stewart

knight did? >> what i will tell you, sir, i am dedicated to finding the answers to what happened and like every secret service agent, we don't shirk our responsibilities. i will remain on and be responsible to the agency, to this committee, to the former president, and to the american public. >> is there a reason you wouldn't just do what stewart knight did after the reagan assassination attempt? >> i believe that i provided an answer. >> there is nothing more that you have to say? do you really believe at this moment given how divided the country is and questioned ask asked that your office in this role is the best for the nation? i'm not saying you can't do something else again do you in your heart that you being in this role is what's right for america at this moment? do you think there are people who are trump supporters who have confidence in you? the one thing we have to have agencies in this country that that transcend politics and have

the confidence of independents, democrats, republicans, progressives, conservatives. do you believe the majority in this country has confidence in you now? >> i believe the country deserves answers and committed to finding those answers and providing those answers. >> i believe director cheatle that you should resign. i think there are colleagues on both sides of the aisle who believe that. i hope you will consider it. yield back. >> chair now recognizes mr. palmer from alabama for five minutes. >> director, did local law enforcement teams have compromise authority to engage a perceived threat? >> yes. >> why do you think they didn't use it? >> i believe that they follow the same use of force that our agency -- >> when you have compromised authority you don't have to get permission if you perceive a

threat. and there were not just the esu units but local law enforcement that had line of sight on the shooter before the shots were taken. one of my questions is there was supposed to be a briefing with the secret service sniper units, your counter assault team members with the contract team, with the local esu teams. that didn't take place. why was that? >> i have been told there has been a briefing. there was a briefing that took place. >> i have been told there wasn't one. >> again, we're still looking into the facts of the investigation. >> let me ask you this. when were you informed that there was a credible threat against president trump, former president trump? when did you learn of that? >> sir, the former president has a number of threats. >> i didn't ask you that. there was a credible threat from iran. when were you informed of that?

>> we have been monitoring the threats for the former president. >> you knew before the rally, right? the site security plan is generally drafted by the site supervisor and the site agent. probably out of the pittsburgh district office. did they take into account the credible threat against president trump? >> our personnel take into account the threats that are out there. >> why would they leave a building, it was 140 yards with a clear line of sight to the president? why was that building not occupied on the roof? you could have kept barney fife on the roof to keep somebody from getting up there. >> the plan developed that day encompassed a number of security mitigations. >> the issue is the site supervisor, the site agent, and

the special agent in charge who i think signed off on the plan did not include that in the inner perimeter and didn't have a plan to secure the building. as i understand it, the butler county esu unit was situated on the second floor of a building next to it but they didn't have a clear line of sight of the roof. the angle was too severe. the photograph that was taken of the young man of the shooter when he had the range finder was taken at 5:15. it wasn't until 5:38 that photograph was transmitted to the secret service sniper units. i don't understand the lack and the communication process and don't understand why people didn't perceive it as a credible threat. the video there was clearly a credible threat. so how is it that all of these mistakes could be made? how many explosive devices were

found on or near the site? >> again, i would have to defer you to the f.b.i. >> i believe they were in his car and i think there might have been one near a main gas line. it wasn't just the fact that he had a rifle. it was the fact that he had the ability to inflict enormous harm, enormous numbers of casualties if those had exploded. i want to know also when your agents conduct a site review, are they fully informed of all of the threats that are being made against the principals that they're protecting? >> what i can tell you is when our agents go out to conduct an advance their whole goal is to insure the safety and security. >> i understand the goal. the failure to secure that

building not only put the former president's life in danger but the lives of individuals in the crowd in danger as well. the reagan shooting there were other people shot at that time as well. and the secret service members' lives were in danger. so i don't understand how you can continue to stay in the position you are in when this was a failure of historic magnitude. 43 years without anything like this happening and you failed in this case in a spectacular way. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you, mr. chair. i want to commend you and the ranking member on your joint statement and for holding this hearing that we might all at

least attempt to get answers. some of us grew up in an era not too unlike what we see today in terms of political violence. some of us remember the november 22, 1963, assassination of president kennedy. some of us, like myself remember two days later when jack ruby on live tv shot and killed lee harvey oswald. we've seen over and over sings that time these kind of attempt. whether the assassination of martin luther king, bobby kennedy or attempted attack on george wallace, the shooting in 1981 of ronald reagan, our friend and colleague steve scalise shooting here in d.c., and the unfortunate attack on paul pelosi and now this matter regarding former president trump. let me try, if i might, to take another walk at this.

people just assume that whoever is in charge takes full responsibility when there has never been at least on this magnitude and scale this sort of failure. so when members ask you are you going to resign and you say you have no intention to, they are perplexed, like many people who watch what's going on. and there are some things i just don't understand. why was the building, the arg building placed outside of the perimeter when clearly it was close enough for someone to launch an attack? >> so again, sir, we're looking into all the details how the advance was comprised. i can tell you there was overwatch on that building provided that day. >> by a drone? >> i'm not going to get into specifics of technology or assets used. >> i think it's fair to say the overwatch failed. the shooter got up on the roof and stayed there for a while and

people had pointed him out. so do you think your overwatch was a failure in that case? >> i think that we need to know the full details to understand how this occurred. >> and why was the rooftop left naked to begin with, can you tell us that considering it was within the line of site and so very close? >> again, i can't speak to the specifics of this particular event site. but what i can tell you is that when the secret service develops an advance plan, they take into account a number of factors when they are building their advance. if there are buildings or areas of concern and overwatch is one of those mitigations that they want to put in place, then they will cover off areas of responsibility. >> i understand that. but the shooter came to the attention of your agency 52 minutes before the former president got to the stage. did anybody get assigned to

watch or cover that individual who had already been seen with an advance finder on him? and other suspicious matters. was anybody assigned to track him? >> what i would like to clarify is a suspicious individual was brought to the attention of our personnel. and again having a range finder at an outdoor event -- >> when the suspicious person was brought to the attention of the secret service, was anybody in the detail ordered to follow and stay with that suspicious person just because they might become a threat? >> we have a number of teams that are on the ground. again, we're trying to verify the timelines of when those notifications were made to our personnel so that they could assume the responsibility of trying to track that individual. >> there has been a lot of discussion, some of which raised itself earlier in this hearing about poor staff morale within

our agency. and i have the july 17th report of government executive, a credible reporting service for the federal government for employees, and the 2023 ranking of places to work within the federal government showed -- this is through the office of personnel management, that the secret service came in 413th out of 459 agencies. can you explain that? >> certainly. what i can tell you is the secret service is a difficult job. it challenges our employees daily. it is holidays, it's weekends, it's no leave periods. >> madam, people come to work knowing that. you do explain that when you hire somebody. they know that. it's the same with other agencies. they miss holidays and come to work at odd hours. but to be one of the worst

places to work within the federal government, 413 out of 459, what do you think as the director there? that's the last question but please answer the question. >> it is a challenging job and challenging environment to be-in-law phonersment. a no-fail mission. our folks with tasked with that every day. i've also taken a number of measures since i've been the director to recruit and retain and stem the tide of attrition in our agency which will hopefully alleviate some of that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. sessions from texas. >> i join in the calls of all of our members to say thank you for doing this hearing on a bipartisan basis. director, i won't sit here and say you ought to resign but i will say that you have not given

us confidence that you have the ability to understand what happened to take the responsibility in terms of understanding. you have spent a number of years, how many years have you been with the agency? >> 29. >> i spent 16 years with at&t and moved receive app times with them and had a really good feel about their operations. how they worked, what was acceptable, who was responsible and i have heard you say today numbers of times well, you have to wait. well, you have to wait. wait for the final report. when is the final final going to happen? how long do we have to wait before you can give us credible answers? you have been there 28 years. you have had a few days to be able to draw your own analysis of this. you should understand the entire process. you talk about being on the team

perhaps in georgia. you have talked about your experience in this experience in this and the professional nature of the agency. that i don't doubt. but the director, just like when i ran my operations at at&t was responsible for making sure they worked and in business it either works or it doesn't work. there is no in between. it either works or it does not work. and your job as the administrator, the director, is to make sure it looks right and works. i have not heard you say one thing about my analysis is, i have asked these questions, it's always i've got to sit back and wait for someone else to decide that. so i will ask you a question that maybe you can answer. have any employees been disciplined for their role in butler, pennsylvania incident? >> no, sir, not at this time. i am asking those questions. >> no employee has been

disciplined and no employee has been placed in any position that would place their job in jeep or dee nor their standing in the agency. >> we're in the process. >> that's not what i asked. you are the person that runs the place. you are the person that knows right from wrong, good from bad. you have had a number of days and now you come before this committee knowing you will be before us and you've got to slough it off to someone else. do you see where there was something that went wrong as a professional at the agency for 28 years or do you have to count on someone else to give you the final report? >> i see that something went wrong and i have acknowledged that something went wrong. >> what went wrong? was the special agent in charge not doing their job? was the shooter given extra time? was the sniper doing their job? these are things that people who have been around for 28 years

can analyze quickly. i watched it live on tv and then within minutes saw a number of facts and factors that would have and should have been known by people who were there. you have got 28 years. you are showing up here telling us and the american public well, i have to wait for the final answer. what is your evaluation? >> i am asking those same questions. >> you are before the committee. tell us what went wrong, a special agent in charge, the person who was there? don't try to play a shell game with us. do you have the ability to effectively as the director of this agency to understand what went wrong and at least tell us i do or don't know what i'm doing? and we come away with -- i'm not asking for you to resign. i'm asking for you, if you've got this experience, then you should be able to say to us we

know what we did wrong. it was a failure in our system and we're immediately making these corrections. that's why you are having a difficult time with this group of members of congress. because we saw it, too. we've seen the things but you are the 28-year expert. you are the person -- and only you that can make the changes and i hear you say i have to wait for a final report before i, of 28 years experience. that is why we think what you are doing -- the answers you are giving us are not correct and you are not using your professional expertise. mr. chairman, i will allow her to respond. >> i am asking those same questions, sir and i assure you when i have a full and complete report of exactly what happened, there will be accountability and we will make changes.

>> before i recognize -- out of curiosity, director. it's been nine days. do you have a ballpark estimate of when mr. mr. sessions asked you will be able to answer? >> so i can tell you -- >> time-wise. >> on our mission assurance internal investigation we're targeting to have that completed within 60 days. there is also an external investigation that will be taking place, there are a number of office of inspector general investigations as well and we are working in concert and then, of course, the department of justice f.b.i. criminal investigation. >> chair recognizes ms. ocasio-cortez from new york. >> what you had just laid out about 60 days, we are currently in the midst of an especially concentrated presidential

campaign in the moment. that is also paired with, of course, elections happening across the country. they are happening in about 100 days. so the notion of a report coming out in 60 days when the threat environment is so high in the united states irrespective of party is not acceptable. i think it's very important to understand that. this is not theater, this is not about jockeying, this is about the safety of some of the most highly targeted and valued targets internationally and domestically in the united states of america. so the idea that a report will be finalized in 60 days let alone prior to any actionable decisions that would be made is simply not acceptable. it has been ten days since an assassination attempt on a former president of the united states regardless of party. there need to be answers.

again, this committee, this is not a moment of theater. we have to make policy decisions and we have to make them now. we do. and that may be -- that may require legislation. that may require policy we must pass in the immediate term and without that, we are flying blind. so the lack of answers and the lack of report is simply not something that we can accept here. director cheatle, is there a standard perimeter that the secret service establishes around an event or are those perimeters independently determined per event and scenario? >> there is no standard. every event and every venue is different and treated as such. >> so each event has a different perimeter that is established depending on the logistics of that event. now you established earlier that the building upon which the shooter operated from was

outside of that established perimeter, correct, for the butler, pennsylvania event? >> it was outside of our secure perimeter, yes. >> now, that building was, i believe, five -- how far away was that building from the president? >> it was proximapproximately 2 yards. >> now the individual used an ar-15 in order to act out his assassination attempt. ar-15 has a range of 400 to 600 yards. my question is why does this secret service perimeter -- why is the secret service protective perimeter shorter than one of the most popular semi automatic weapons in the united states? >> there are a number of weapons out there with a number of

ranges. again, an advance was completed. the determination of the perimeter i won't speak to specifics but there are a number of factors that are taken into account when we determine our perimeter. some of it has to do with terrain and buildings and some of it has to do with assets and resources that are available. >> and so what i'm hearing is that a perimeter was not established outdoors, in an outdoor venue that would prevent an ar-15, one of the most common weapons used in mass shootings, from being able to be within the range of secret service protection. >> the perimeter was established and even though there were buildings that were outside of that perimeter it wasn't just that building. there were a number of buildings in the area. and there was overwatch that was created to help mitigate some of those buildings. >> respectfully, dr. cheatle, as well, as a person who has

experienced an enormous amount of threat incidents, including incidents that have never been reported publicly, there is a common pattern that happens here, whether secret service, f.b.i., capitol police, local departments. after a critical security failure, we often hear there will be an independent investigation. it gets set up. the expectation two tore three months after the incident and then nothing really occurs from there. the report is usually not satisfactory to the questions that are usually being raised here and most importantly, corrective action is rarely taken. my -- if i were to state anything that i think is profoundly important is that we need to have answers to the public. ideally i would encourage you and the agency to be more

forthright with the members that still have yet to have their questioning because the public deserves to have full confidence and the stakes are too high. the violence that could break out in this political moment regardless of party in the event of someone getting hurt constitutes a national security threat to the entire country. >> ma'am, if i could speak to something you said at the outset when you started your questioning. i want to assure you and everyone on this committee that i'm not waiting for a report to take action. we have been conducting analysis all along and we have been adding additional features to our security details since this incident occurred. >> and i hope you can highlight and illuminate what some of those terre and give them to other members' questioning as well.

>> chair recognizes mr. biggs. >> i request unanimous consent for the photo to go into the record. >> it is order. >> your agency has a no-fail mission and on july 13th you failed. it resulted in the death of corey comperatore and serious injuries to two other attendees, besides the injuries to president trump. it is unfathomable that a 20-year-old on the radar of secret service and local law enforcement before president trump went on stage was table to climb onto the roof of a building with a rifle and fire off multiple rounds before being neutralized. was mr. crooks acting alone? >> again, i would have to refer you to the f.b.i.'s investigation. >> was he just a lone gunman? >> i would have to refer you to the f.b.i.'s investigation for motive. >> what did the technical services division --

>> those are questions we're asking about the perimeter. >> you are sitting here today. come on, director. everybody said this. you knew you would be asked that question because it has been asked multiple times. so this is an easy one. what did they determine was going to be the event perimeter? you should know that. this is not i have to wait until someone else tells me. what was it? >> again i don't want to speak to specifics of the event and the place. >> this is a specific that you ought to know. as someone who said the buck stops with me and i'll stay in my job and give the answers to the american people and i know what happened. except for you aren't going to tell us. you aren't going to tell the american people. you yourself said in an interview that foments this notion of conspiracy theories. when you sit here and repeatedly tell people i have to wait, frustrated everybody on this

committee, guess what? it undermines your credibility and whether you are really going to get to it. i will ask you again what did the technical service division determine would be the event perimeter? >> we are still gathering reports. we are interviewing individuals. >> you know what it is, you aren't going to tell us. >> when i have those details i will most certainly share those. >> was the gun already on the roof or did the shooter carry the gun up with him? >> i don't have that information at this time. >> where was the sweep done prior to the rally? >> i do not have that information at this time. >> most of us here have been any events and secret service has been there. there has been security. i can't tell you how many times we have said there's going to be a security holder right here. we are going to wait. we weighed one or two or

3 minutes. and yet, we are hearing from you, apparently, that there were no holds in place. ever instituted here with president trump's going on stage. you said -- i think this is connected. they hadn't adjudicated that shooter to be a threat. he was adjudicated to be a suspicious person even though we have direct dynamic video that he put on the video for us. i guess my question for you i is -- i think you answered this. i want to see if you are consistent with what you said 1.5 hours ago. what do you do if a suspicious person is identified by the agency? >> at a number of our events, it is not unusual. >> i know it is not unusual. what do you do? >> though said individuals identified as suspicious, we will send teams out. >> was a team sent out? >> they were teams that were sent to identify an interview that individual.

>> they were sent to interview individual who scampered up in camo on a roof within 10030 yards of his target. and, did your team get there? when did your team get there to conduct that interview? >> i don't have the details on the timeline. >> if they did send a team, and they are going to interview him, and you have described that earlier. why didn't they put a security hold on president trump going on stage at that rally? >> at a number of our protected sites, there are suspicious individuals that are identified all the time. it doesn't necessarily mean that they constitute a threat. >> of course not. you've got a guy scampering up inside of a building on top of a roof. it is identified to you. you said you send a team there. you can't answer that.

this gets to one of my finer points, mr. chairman if i can make it. that is, we can have these kind of interview sessions, everybody gets to kiss the pick. 5 minutes and she gets to stonewall us and not deliver answers. we say we are going to put together a congressional committee, a blue ribbon committee. the same stuff will happen. i am calling and i will support that. i will tell you this. i am calling on the speaker to give advice and put together a truly independent commission unqualified former secret service agents, presidential and vip protective services people who can actually conduct this kind of investigation and give us real answers. i don't think you're going to give us those answers. you should have come to day get ready to give us answers. i call upon you to resign today, today. i also say, i've got a bunch of