Piccirillo: Lead Planner for 2 Presidential Visits Calls for Consequences

The article discusses the ‍criticism faced​ by ⁢the Secret Service following a failed assassination attempt⁢ on former President Donald ⁤Trump. The author, with experience in ⁢security planning, explains the complexities involved in‌ coordinating⁤ security ⁤efforts⁢ between local law enforcement ⁢and federal agencies⁤ for such events. The author questions the lapses in‍ security that ‌allowed the attempted assassination to occur and highlights the need for accountability within the Secret Service. The article advocates ‌for ​a thorough debriefing to address the ​failures and ensure better security measures ⁢in the‍ future. It ⁢emphasizes the importance of holding⁣ individuals accountable⁢ for their mistakes rather than treating⁤ finding faults as ⁢a sport.


​It’s the epitome of American culture to criticize the decisions and performance of others. Be it athletes or politicians, Monday-morning quarterbacking is a sport in and of itself. It’s a sport that requires no relevant experience or expertise and thus there is no barrier to participation.

On July 13, former President Donald Trump narrowly avoided an assassin’s bullet. Since then, there’s been no shortage of criticism of the Secret Service. Theories ranging from conspiracy to incompetence are being offered to explain the failure.

To find fault objectively necessitates the use of evidence, testimony and some expertise in the subject.

I have some experience in security planning. As a member of the Seattle Police Department’s Special Deployment Unit, I was lead planner for two presidential visits made by Bill Clinton in 1996. I am not an expert on presidential protection, federal law enforcement protocols or the rules of engagement for snipers associated with these types of events.

The relevance of my experience relates to how local law enforcement interfaces with the Secret Service and other federal agencies when planning for an event of this type.

For events such as Trump’s July 13 rally, the Secret Service sends out an advance team for preliminary planning purposes several weeks before the event. During this time, the roles and responsibilities of local law enforcement are defined versus those of federal agencies.

During later meetings, the local plan is disseminated to federal agencies involved for review and approval. Even in a time-crunch scenario, there is no alternative to making sure no detail is missed.

I created a plan mobilizing, assigning and providing the logistics for more than 200 SPD officers who were deployed to the presidential venues.

Several local agencies were involved in security for Trump’s event in Butler, Pennsylvania. The local agencies that might have contributed personnel are relatively small. The Butler Police Department has 20 uniformed officers and the Butler County Sheriff’s Office has only 34 deputies, according to their websites.

Small departments such as these couldn’t provide nearly enough officers to supplement the Secret Service for a crowd estimated at 15,000 people. It’s important to note the events for which I planned in 1996 did not draw crowds half the size as did Trump’s in Pennsylvania, and yet we had hundreds of officers assigned.

The Secret Service has said the roof from which the would-be assassin fired the shots was the responsibility of local law enforcement, as it was beyond the Secret Service’s perimeter. Then Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle absurdly suggested the roof from which the would-be assassin took the shots had too steep a slope for agents to safely staff. Then she claimed the building was secured from within.

I can assure you, no building with an unobstructed line of sight to the protectee from the roof is “secured” from within.

Is it possible Cheatle determined Trump’s life was less important than the fear of an OSHA or Labor and Industries violation? Were Secret Service agents safer with the roof unmanned when they had to use their bodies as shields to protect the former president?

There are reports the shooter was identified as a suspicious individual prior to the rally and that designation was upgraded to a threat when he was observed walking the rally grounds with a range finder in his hands.

Despite this, the Secret Service allowed Trump to take the stage. Why?

After these events, a debrief occurs in which what went right and wrong is examined to ensure future events are safer. This should have occurred by now, and thus the specific deficiencies that led to this epic failure should be known. That we don’t know these details today is unacceptable.

To be clear, someone must answer for what happened in Pennsylvania. Firing Cheatle will not bring back the dead, or undo the harm caused Trump and the injured spectators. Nonetheless, it’s needed to restore confidence in the agency.

Finding fault shouldn’t be sport, it should be the consequence of failure.

The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either d or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.






" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker