Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

FBI Deputy Director Testifies On Trump Assassination Attempt; Acting Secret Service Director Testifies On Trump Assassination Attempt; Rowe Shares New Protocols In Wake Of Trump Assassination Attempt. Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired July 30, 2024 - 12:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:30:12]

DANA BASH, CNN HOST: Welcome back to Inside Politics. We are going to get back now to the hearing in the United States Senate with the Acting Secret Service Director, and now he is being questioned by Oklahoma Senator James Lankford.

PAUL ABBATE, FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: I want to be fair, I have not read the reports directly, but I've been briefed on some of it. They were, at times, during the time frame we're talking about here, on post within the AGR building, and I do believe, but I would want to confirm this at some point, one or more did venture out in an effort to, you know, locate and isolate.

SEN. JAMES LANKFORD (R), OKLAHOMA: We understand from the timeline that they were also looking for this individual that was suspicious that they had left that post to be able to try to look for him on the ground, at different points to try to be able to see if they could get a different perspective.

What we're trying to figure out is during that time period that he actually climbed on the roof, assembled a firearm or took a firearm with him or picked one up, whatever it might have been there, that they were able to actually see him if they were able to look left as been acknowledged in the photos that are up there.

ABBATE: Senator, I don't know the exact timing and the movements of each officer that was out there, but what I would derive from it is they were all focused on locating the shooter --

LANKFORD: Right.

ABBATE: -- the suspicious person at the time. And then as we've all seen, the one officer attempted to get on the roof directly. There were efforts going on in those final minutes --

LANKFORD: Right.

ABBATE: -- on the video to try to get to this person.

LANKFORD: We've got one officer being boosted up by another officer to look up on the roof because people on the ground had said there's someone up there and they have a gun that's crawling on that roof, and so they climbed up to be able to see it. He turned around with a rifle, he came down, and then at that point he gets on a local radio that he has and says there's someone on the roof with a gun. Is that correct?

ABBATE: Yes, Senator, I believe that that's accurate.

LANKFORD: So what's the rest of the radio communication? We've heard that first call in. We know it's about 30 seconds from the time he called in, so the actual first shot rang out. What else was discussed on the radio during that 30-second time period?

ABBATE: Senator, I don't have -- we have the radio communications. They were -- the local radio communications were recorded and captured and we do have that as part of the investigation. You know, the key points to me, that local officer communicating that he sees the individuals, he's armed, that's at about 6-11 and some seconds, I think it's three seconds, and then he identifies it as a long gun at about 6-11 and 11 seconds.

And the shots, which all happened quickly together, I believe happened within probably 30 seconds. So --

LANKFORD: We're talking about over the radio because there's a command center there.

ABBATE: Yes.

LANKFORD: We're all radios, including the local, as they're all being listened to to try to be able to review. There's a statement that has the word gun in it that's coming out across the radio. We only know that first communication. We don't know what came back and forth on that.

We'd like to get transcripts of that conversation that was done, local law enforcement. But coming into that command center, there's also the word gun coming through one of the radio frequencies. I would think that would be communicated pretty quickly to everybody across the spectrum. 30 seconds is not long, but that's an NFL play, plus a huddle, plus the next play.

I mean, that's quite a bit of time still to be able to respond. When Secret Service moved to be able to protect the president once the first shots were fired, within two seconds, they're gathered around him. So trying to be able to figure out where the word gun got lost in radio communication here and what else was said.

ABBATE: I will -- certainly, we will share the communications with you and the committee, Senator. I will note, just from my notes, there was effort within those minutes and seconds once the gun was announced. There's other communications where the local police are talking about deploying a QRF and responding and that they've got the buildings surrounded.

So it's not in a void. I don't want to give you the misinterpretation --

LANKFORD: Typically, I would assume for Secret Service, if they hear over the radio over something gun, they're moving to be able to protect the detail, the person they're protecting at that point, the protectee, that they're moving pretty quickly at that point, if that's what's actually coming out.

And so that's what I'm trying to be able to figure out, how that didn't get communicated out to the people that were directly in front of the former president at that point. And the last question I'd have, I only have a second left, is just, was there any overhead drone? We've talked about counter drone, but any visibility that Secret Service had to be able to see the field and all the operation in their own ability?

ABBATE: No, sir. And as was asked by another senator earlier, it appears that there was an offer by a state or local agency to fly a drone on our behalf, and I'm getting to the bottom as to why we turned that down.

LANKFORD: OK, thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator Kennedy, you're recognized for your questions.

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Abbate, am I saying your name right?

ABBATE: Yes, Senator, thank you.

KENNEDY: You are the Deputy Director of the FBI, is that correct?

ABBATE: Yes, Senator.

[12:35:04]

KENNEDY: Is there any doubt in your mind or in the collective mind of the FBI that President Trump was shot in the ear by a bullet fired by the assassin Crooks?

ABBATE: There -- Senator, there is absolutely no doubt in the FBI's mind whether --

KENNEDY: It wasn't --

ABBATE: former President Trump was hit with the, with a bullet and wounded in the ear. No doubt, there never has been.

KENNEDY: OK.

ABBATE: I've been part of this investigation since the very beginning, and that has never been raised.

KENNEDY: You're sure?

ABBATE: Yes. KENNEDY: It wasn't a space laser?

ABBATE: No.

KENNEDY: It wasn't a murder hornet?

ABBATE: Absolutely not.

KENNEDY: It wasn't Sasquatch?

ABBATE: No, Senator.

KENNEDY: It was a bullet?

ABBATE: It was a bullet, Senator.

KENNEDY: Fired by Crooks?

ABBATE: Yes, sir.

KENNEDY: That hit President Trump in the ear and almost killed him?

ABBATE: 100 percent, Senator.

KENNEDY: OK, glad we cleared that up. I don't want to get off the subject here. Did the FBI just settle two lawsuits, one wholly, one in part, in which the FBI agreed to give Peter Strzok $1.2 million and Ms. Lisa Page $800,000?

ABBATE: It's my understanding, Senator, that the Department of Justice was involved in that, not the FBI.

KENNEDY: The FBI had nothing to do with it?

ABBATE: There may have been consultation with our general counsel's office, but --

KENNEDY: Did the FBI have to sign off on it?

ABBATE: I don't know the answer to that. I don't believe so, but I would want to confirm that.

KENNEDY: I would like you to -- this would be the same Lisa Page who said to Mr. Strzok, quote, "Trump's not ever going to become president, right, right," to which Mr. Strzok said, quote, "no, no, he won't. We will stop it." That's the Peter Strzok and Lisa Page I'm talking about. I need to know if the FBI signed off on this lawsuit.

ABBATE: We will get that answer for you, Senator.

KENNEDY: And then I need to know who signed off on it.

BASH: OK, as Senator Kennedy goes off topic, let's turn to a congressman who is serving on a similar committee on the House side, Congressman Mike Waltz of Florida, it's a bipartisan task force to investigate the attempted assassination of former President Trump. First, just your thoughts on what we have heard so far in the Senate. I know you've been monitoring it.

REP. MIKE WALTZ (R-FL): Well, Dana, you know, first and foremost, let me just say the tone is completely different. And I want to give kudos to the acting director of the Secret Service and the deputy director of the FBI. Then we had from the now former Secret Service Director Cheatle, who was obtuse, frankly, was smug and really just sat behind an ongoing investigation.

So I think being more forthcoming, being more transparent, the deputy director saying usually we don't give details of ongoing investigations. However, given the historic, unprecedented, nearly catastrophic nature of this assassination attempt, we're going to level as much as we can with the American people. So that's one.

Number two, we didn't get to the bottom of what I think is the core issue yet and why I commend Speaker Johnson for setting up a bipartisan task force. Was President Trump denied resources? Was his core detail, which obviously he is not your average former president like a Jimmy Carter or a W. Bush, repeatedly requested and denied resources?

The agents told me the day after the attempt that they were. Mayorkas immediately, publicly on CNN, said that's irresponsible and false. And since then, as did the Secret Service spokesperson, I confirmed Director Cheatle approved that denial and they've since walked that back.

Today, what we heard is there will be no further denials going forward. But did we have some and why? Those are some of the things that really jumped out at me.

BASH: Yes. And then just in the last few minutes, Senator Ted Cruz said without any evidence that the reason that the Secret Service leadership did not approve that extra help for the former president, the candidate for president, Donald Trump, was political. Do you have any evidence to back that up? Because the acting director said flat out that it's not because of politics, that there is a --

WALTZ: Well, what --

BASH: -- that there is a difference between somebody who has to be ready to launch a nuclear strike, God forbid, meaning a current president and a former president.

[12:40:14]

Well, I don't think that's -- I didn't see that portion with Senator Cruz. That's not the distinction I'm making. Of course, the acting president has a larger detail. But what the agents are telling me, and I want to emphasize that, is that President Trump was given the same size detail for a former president that all other former presidents are given, that there were not additional considerations for the foreign threats, for the additional domestic threats.

And the biggest piece was the number of rallies that he's doing. And at least what these agents are telling me is kind of the tone from headquarters was, we're not going to burn through our budget for all of these extra agents and all of this extra overtime and travel because the former president wants to have a lot of rallies. And I think that this is an obvious key point.

He's also a candidate --

BASH: Right.

WALTZ: -- and he's been a candidate a lot longer than that. We haven't had a former president as candidate since the 1800s. And I'm not sure we'll get to the bottom of it that that was appropriately accounted for, and it almost cost him his life.

BASH: And, you know, the other thing that has been stunning to hear from the acting Secret Service director is the complete disconnect between local law enforcement who they were relying on for whatever reason, maybe it is because of the fact that they didn't have the personnel there. Total disconnect between them and the Secret Service, lack of communication, real time communication, which led to --

WALTZ: Right.

BASH: -- the Secret Service not knowing that local law enforcement was aware of this shooter, got onto the roof. And there was just -- it wasn't communicated to the Secret Service in time to get the former president away, to stop the rally in the first place --

WALTZ: Right.

BASH: -- whatever it was that they could do to prevent this.

WALTZ: Well, it's completely unacceptable. I'm glad the acting director explicitly stated that. I will say having done multinational and multi-agency operations myself, anytime you get multiple agencies involved, you're going to have a more difficult, you know, time in terms of coordinating. But it does go back to the resources issue.

Of course, his core detail would have preferred additional Secret Service agents. One of the things we need to get to the bottom of is, were they requested for that building, for the AGR building? Were they denied in the advance? And again, one of the things that came out with Director Cheatle in the House testimony is from the local field office, 12 agents went to Dr. Jill Biden's event in Pittsburgh, and only three were assigned to the rally.

So, again, is there some formula, or are they sending resources according to the threat, the size of the crowd, and those things? And, you know, and why were -- why was that disparate amount of resources --

BASH: Yes.

WALTZ: -- sent to one and not the other, is something else we need to get to the bottom of.

BASH: I haven't heard in this particular hearing, but my colleagues have asked the Secret Service if any resources were diverted from Trump to Jill Biden and the answer was absolutely --

WALTZ: But it did come out in Director Cheatle's testimony. It did come out in Director Cheatle's testimony just last week. Twelve were sent to Dr. Jill, only three were sent to President Trump's rally. Why? And was that reflective of the threat?

BASH: OK. Well, we'll definitely try to get to the bottom of that. What other questions do you, before I let you go and get back to this hearing, what other questions do you think are crucial to get from not just the acting Secret Service director, but the FBI, who of course are in charge of this investigation?

WALTZ: Well, I think we need to confirm, number one, that he indeed acted alone, or did he have some type of help. You do have overlaid with this. Iran sending operatives across our southern border, the FBI has sent out bulletins to that effect, that they routed through Venezuela and are actively recruiting assassins, not only for former President Trump, but members of his cabinet involved in the Soleimani strike.

So we absolutely need to confirm that. And he did have overseas accounts that we haven't gotten to the bottom of. And then I think you have broader issues, Dana, in terms of the Secret Service's budget, which has doubled over time. You know, do they have what they need to protect 36 individuals, coupled with a very heightened threat environment?

And we don't have months to figure this out. We need to figure it out right now, because we're obviously in the middle of a very contentious campaign with just a lot of threats and a wide open border.

[12:45:08]

BASH: Well, we certainly do have a very intense and a very short window. And everybody hopes that they do figure this out very soon. You came on also to talk about the 2024 race, that race you were just talking about. You are a close ally of the former president. Please come back and we'll get to that on a day where we're not having this breaking news in this hearing.

WALTZ: Will do. Thanks so much.

BASH: OK, thank you so much. And now I want to get back to this live hearing. Senator Jacky Rosen of Nevada is questioning.

RONALD L. ROWE JR., U.S. SECRET SERVICE ACTING DIRECTOR: You know, to me, as I overlay him on over top of, say, John Hinckley, who tried to shoot President Reagan, I see an individual based on information that I have now, some of the great work that the FBI has done. We have an individual who's a loner. We have an individual who was focused on Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

Hinckley traveled the 80 campaign, and we know that he followed President Carter. It just on March of '81, he happened to show up in Washington, D.C., and he saw an opportunity to try to attack President Reagan. So when it comes to the Secret Service, in 1981 was a watershed moment for us.

We have people that are, for whatever reason, fixated on carrying out an attack against the president of the United States or one of our protectees. And in this instance, you have the assailant who was a loner. Obviously, he was researching. He had researched the Democratic National Convention. He had researched and Googled or used a search engine about the president, the former president.

And so I think he had moved towards an idea that he was going to try to do something. And so when I look at this, we don't have a challenge with the FBI or the intelligence community. I think what we always try to wrestle with is trying to line up and see people as they're starting to head down a pathway towards violence.

And it's something that we have spent a lot of time and resources in with our National Threat Assessment Center to try to gain a better understanding so that we can help our agents in the field as they're doing these protective intelligence cases and these investigations to be able to make a determination. Is somebody generally a threat or do they need mental health or do they need some other type of service?

SEN. JACKY ROSEN (D), NEVADA: Thank you. I appreciate that.

My time is over. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator Cotton, you're recognized for your questions.

SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): At the onset, I want to express, as many members have, as President Trump did, the admiration and respect for the bravery and skill of the officers who were on site that day, Secret Service officers, as well as all the local law enforcement.

As it happened, my nine-year-old son was watching with me that afternoon, and it's hard to get him to turn away from it. And he asked who all those men and women were who jumped on Mr. Trump. And I said, in layman's terms, those are his bodyguards. And he said, what are they doing? I said, they're protecting him from a bullet. And he said, actually? And I said, yes.

He said, for real? And I said, yes. And it was hard for him to process that. But as a reminder, I told him that there are men and women in the Secret Service, in law enforcement, in the military, who are willing to die for our country. And it's an important lesson, I think, that everyone should take away from this, that you had very brave men and women on the ground there who were doing their job to protect this country, to protect a former president and a nominee for president, as they do every day for so many other protectees.

Obviously, there were failures in the planning and preparation for this event. Mr. Rowe, we've heard that the shooter had a golf rangefinder. Was that not on the list of prohibited items at an event like this?

ROWE: Currently, it is not on the list of prohibitive items. But we're going to make that change, Senator. COTTON: I just -- John Kennedy can't get into an LSU football game with a flask.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

COTTON: Well, he probably can, but he's not supposed to. It just seems like common sense that you don't need a laser rangefinder at an event like this. And it feels like a lot of that was just the lack of common sense being exercised. Are officers not empowered on the front line to use common sense to say, like, if a guy has a laser rangefinder, he should be detained, or at least stopped, and that's why he's carrying it around?

If you have a building like this that's not secure from 150 meters away, someone, even the front line, lowest level, most junior officer should be able to kind of like send up the red flag immediately and say, like, we need to halt everything right now and figure out what the hell is going on. I mean, do officers not feel empowered to use that kind of common sense?

ROWE: I would hope they would, Senator. I can tell you from our uniformed division officers that run our magnetometer screening, they do a tremendous job. And even though something may or may not be on the prohibitive items list, they are well trained, and they do exercise that good common sense.

COTTON: And you want --

ROWE: I want them.

COTTON: -- the support message. OK, I want every one of your officers all around the country to hear that their acting director wants them to exercise common sense.

[12:50:15]

It doesn't have to be policy or protocol or procedure, they should exercise common sense. Thank you for that. So it was reported right before Ms. Cheatle's hearing last week that, in fact, President Trump's detail had requested more resources, and those had been denied.

She said that she did not deny those resources. You've testified this morning that you did not either. So who did? I mean, the Secret Service is not the post office. It's not this vast bureaucracy. Like, I'm not surprised to hear that you knew the counter sniper. It's a small agency, and you have a lot of career officers. Like, surely you've gotten to the bottom by now on whose desk this request landed and who denied it.

ROWE: So, Senator, sometimes when they make a request, they may not have the asset available. For example, there may be, instead of -- the detail may say, hey, we want 15 magnetometers. We'll look at it based on what the event size. We'll say, hey, listen, we're going to send 10 based on our protocols of screening so many. We have a flow rate of how many people we can put through. When it comes to a counter sniper or something like that, because I know that's been the subject of some media reporting where they have requested counter snipers. We do have a finite number of counter snipers. And so what we try to do is if we cannot fill that asset, and that's where we'll say, hey, we can't fill this assignment.

However, through the field office, they will use local law enforcement resources. And so in those situations, for example, in the one that has been the subject of a lot of reporting with Pickens, South Carolina, they, in fact, did use local assets to be able to do that. And there were three counter sniper teams.

They -- one of them was formerly with the Secret Service Uniform Division. And so they actually used the same practices that we use. So it's not that there was a drop in the capability. They actually used the best practices that we would use. So the asset may be denied by Secret Service between the war room and that conversation with the detail in the field, but that doesn't equate to a vulnerability or a gap.

COTTON: OK. One final question about the Iran threat. As you know, Iran made credible threats against several former Trump administration officials, many of whom still have government provided security details to this day. Ms. Cheatle removed Secret Service protection from Robert O'Brien last year. Were you involved in that decision?

ROWE: So, Senator, he was a memorandum protectee, meaning that the president authorized protection for him. We do not weigh in on who gets protection.

COTTON: So you're still protecting some others. I won't reveal their names. You are still protecting others. And other personal security offices in the federal government are protecting others. Other officials don't reveal their names. Like, who made the decision that Robert O'Brien no longer needed a security detail, despite Iran's ongoing credible threats?

ROWE: So I can tell you, sir, it wasn't the Secret Service. We don't factor into that decision.

COTTON: And can you take a look at why that happened now that you're in charge and consider the possibility that he might still need that protection, given all of his counterparts in the Trump administration still have protection?

ROWE: I will do so, Senator.

COTTON: But I just -- go ahead.

ROWE: And -- no, you go ahead.

COTTON: I would say, like, again, I'm not going to reveal the protective details, but I'm pretty confident that the agency can get this done. And I think it needs to get done if you look at the kind of ongoing threats that he and all these others face.

ROWE: Yes. I will, sir. And --

COTTON: Despite all the resource constraints we've talked about today, he's not the president of the United States. He doesn't have an 18-car motorcade, nor do any of the others. I think he needs that protective detail. And now that you're in charge, I'm asking you to take a new look at that and also talk to your supervisors inside the department about whether you can spare just that small, limited amount of resources, OK?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator Welch, you're recognized for your question.

ROWE: I will, sir.

SEN. PETER WELCH (D-VT): Thank you very much. You know, there's -- first of all, thank you both for the tremendous work you do and for all the folks behind you and under you. So thank you for that. I kind of want to follow up a little bit on Senator Cotton. You know, there's three issues that have been raised.

One is the selection of who gets protection, and you've addressed that just now. The other is whether it's a budget issue, which I don't necessarily think it is. But then there's the operational question. Was this an operational failure? And it appears to me that's where the focus should be.

[12:55:02]

And one of the issues on the operations is the capacity of people who are part of the team, both Secret Service and also the local law enforcement, their capacity to act on what they see. And this is what Senator Cotton, I think, was talking about with common sense. You know, you mentioned that the sniper was authorized immediately to act.

He wasn't checking in with anyone, right? And he took out the shooter as quickly as he could. But according to the timeline, you had local law enforcement capture two photographs of the shooter at 5:10. At 5:32, local law enforcement officers spot a suspicious person who turned out to be the shooter with a phone and a range finder.

At 5:46 --

BASH: You have been watching our live coverage of this very important Senate hearing, looking into the assassination attempt of Donald Trump.

CNN News Central will pick up our coverage after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)