Since July 13, how many times have you asked yourself why former President Trump's would-be assassin had a drone, but the Secret Service did not? Maybe that's the reason why Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe testified in Tuesday's joint Senate committee hearing that the attack was the result of a failure of imagination by the Secret Service.
It doesn't take a foray into the realm of the imagination to figure out the real answer, however. Indeed in Realville, the multiple answers to the question of why the Secret Service didn't fly a drone over the site are all wrong.
The person in charge of overseeing the securing the Butler, Pa., rally, whose identity is being hidden, said they didn't green-light the use of one.
The decision not to have someone go to Costco or Walmart and buy one is a failure of imagination, to coin a phrase. No one on the ground came up with that idea, in the days leading up to the assassination attempt, either.
Related: How Have These Not Been Banned From Trump Rallies Already?
Potentially worse is that there was terrible connectivity for the Secret Service to run a drone even if it had one. That's because of all the cell phone use on the site. In other words, there was no dedicated way to assure that the Secret Service would be able to run said drone and their comms on a site outside of the Beltway. Seems like that's a failure of imagination too.
But the worst answer of all the bad and wrong answers to the question of why the Secret Service had no overwatch by drone is this: local law enforcement offered to run a drone for the feds but the Secret Service, ahem, turned it down.
This came out of the joint hearing by the Senate Judiciary and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committees on Tuesday.
Toward the end of his colloquy with Rowe, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, Republican from Realville, got down to the matter.
Hawley: Do you know if someone was supposed to be posted to the roof [of the ARG building]? [...] Was someone posted to the roof, do you know that?
Rowe: I do not know that to be a fact.
Hawley: Can I ask you why you don't know that?
Rowe: Again, Senator, we are looking at this. And they should have been on that roof and the fact that they were in the building is something I'm still trying to understand.
Hawley: [W]histleblowers are telling us more than you are and you haven't ascertained if there was supposed to be law enforcement on the roof! That seems to be a very basic fact.
This is either abject stupidity on the part of the Secret Service or an attempt to deploy chaff in order to confuse senators like Lindsey Graham ("Do you need more money?").
Related: Secret Service Sniper Warns of Another Assassination Attempt Before Election
Now comes the drone question.
Hawley: I'm also told that local law enforcement suppliers offered the Secret Service drones and you declined them. Is that true?
Rowe: So Senator, one, I've been very transparent and forthcoming—
Hawley: Uh, the agency has not been transparent and forthcoming, so please, let's not go there!
Rowe: I have been forthcoming, sir.
Hawley: That remains to be seen. You've been on the job a few days. So far you've fired nobody. Now, the drones. Were you offered drones?
Rowe: There was an offer to fly a drone that day.
Hawley: Why did you deny it?
Rowe: Uh, again, I think the ability of local law enforcement to provide an asset we probably should have taken them up on them it... if it was offered.
"If it was offered." The former Obama and Biden political appointee just can't concede a fact that he's already conceded.
We don't know why the Secret Service turned it down, but, based on the results, it was the worst of a batch of bad answers, no?
Join the conversation as a VIP Member