Homeland Security agents guard Trump at July rally in Pennsylvania
- Most agents protecting Trump during the July rally were from Homeland Security and had minimal training.
- Senator Hawley criticized the decision to assign these agents, who were pulled from other investigations.
- The incident raises serious concerns about the adequacy of security measures for former presidents.
During a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, Donald Trump faced an assassination attempt by shooter Thomas Matthew Crooks. Reports indicate that the majority of the agents assigned to protect Trump were from the Department of Homeland Security, rather than the Secret Service, and had received minimal training. Senator Josh Hawley revealed that these agents had only completed a two-hour online webinar, with claims that the audio for the training was often non-functional. This lack of adequate preparation raised serious concerns about the safety protocols in place for a former president. Hawley criticized the decision to assign Homeland Security personnel, who were reportedly pulled from child exploitation investigations, to Trump's protective detail. He emphasized that these agents were not typically involved in such security roles, which further complicated the situation. The senator also expressed frustration over the lack of transparency from the Secret Service and FBI regarding the events of the rally. In a dramatic turn of events, a local SWAT team intervened during the assassination attempt, firing the first shots that damaged Crooks' rifle and ultimately stopped the shooting spree. This critical action was not mentioned by Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe Jr. during his testimony before Congress, raising questions about the coordination and response of federal agencies during the incident. The information surrounding the rally and the security measures taken has largely come to light through whistleblowers, highlighting potential gaps in the protective measures for high-profile individuals. The incident has sparked a debate about the adequacy of training and the responsibilities of various agencies in ensuring the safety of former presidents.