New video of Correspondents' Dinner shooting raises questions about presidential security

Geoff Bennett:

The Justice Department released high resolution video showing the moment an armed man stormed past security at the White House Correspondents' Dinner.

The incident is raising serious questions about the security posture surrounding the president at high-profile public events.

We're joined now by Juliette Kayyem of the Homeland Security Project at Harvard's Kennedy School. She previously served as assistant DHS secretary in the Obama administration.

Juliette, it's great to see you.

So, look, there are lots of questions, as you know, about the shot that struck the U.S. Secret Service agent. The U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, says there's no evidence of friendly fire.

But the video, this single video, is not definitive. What does this footage show us and what does it not show us?

Juliette Kayyem, Former Assistant DHS Secretary:

So it shows us, it shows the suspect going through a security metal detector, essentially.

It also -- it shows him speeding up. It shows him trying to reach a gun. And then the frame-by-frame shows some dust, sort of a dust-up literally up above, which would suggest that there had been a gun fired, because afterwards you then see the Secret Service pick up their guns. So the prosecutors will say this shows that he had deadly intent and that the Secret Service were responding.

But I will be honest with you, the frame-by-frame is not dispositive in any way. What the government released was on different speeds. It's sort of slowed down and sped up. So a good defense attorney is going to wonder why that is happening.

What you also don't see is, you any movement like, a sort of a muzzle from his gun go off. So it's a long way of saying lawyers are going to debate this in court. It's certainly not definitive.

The more important thing is, why is -- I don't quite understand why the government is sort of going for broke on this issue. Friendly fire is known to happen. It's not like a moral outrage. It happens when bad people come with guns to areas with police presence.

And so I don't -- I don't quite know why the administration is so stuck on this issue. Even if there were friendly fire, they're still intent to kill the president by the assassin.

Geoff Bennett:

Well, on that point, the Secret Service director, Sean Curran, in defending his agents says the site was set up perfectly. The video -- this is about a half-hour into the dinner. The video shows the agents, some of them, removing the magnetometers and the suspect appears to exploit that exact moment.

He's got that running start as he sort of barrels through. Is that what a perfect setup looks like?

Juliette Kayyem:

I would never say perfect ever, and I would certainly not say it after there was an attempted assassination attack, only because the truth is, is, the -- Director Curran, if you said to him, you have to do this again next year, he would in no way do it the same way.

We all know that there were vulnerabilities. So in the Secret Service's defense, in other words, where do I look for the highlights of this planning, they had a secure zone. That secure zone was never breached. And the president was truly not under any direct threat. They got him out of there in time.

So if you look at from the perspective of the security zone, nothing bad ever happened. Of course, the fear -- the shooting and all the badness outside the secure zone, of course, impacts everyone. And so I think the question for Director Curran is sort of both this or what we call the mixed environment, the public and private at a hotel like this.

Do you really want to have those for a president, for President Trump or any president? And also, at some stage, the secure zone may need to be extended further because of the nature of gun violence and political violence in this country.

Geoff Bennett:

Well, say more about that, because this is now the third attempted attack on President Trump. So, from a protection standpoint, does that fundamentally change the model?

Juliette Kayyem:

It probably does in one way, which is you're just going to be more conscious and do a lot more planning for the president's non-home, sort of when he gets out of the house, out of the White House.

And the reason why I say that is because I look at these three assassination attempts. One happens in a open air political rally. The second happens at a private golf course and the third in the basement of a hotel. So any time he's going to get out, there's going to be vulnerabilities.

Now, the White House has been saying that means he needs more protection or a ballroom at the White House. That's not how it works, in between a White House that no one's invited to and the fact we have a democracy, where you want your president to engage with people and not just the people around him, but you want presidents to engage the public.

There's a lot more that we can do security wise in particular, maybe extending that security zone. But almost every planner I have talked to since last weekend said, like, just don't have it in the hotel. Go to the Convention Center in D.C. Secure the area around the Convention Center. You won't have residents, and you won't have a public.

It's not rocket science, actually.

Geoff Bennett:

You mentioned the president talking up his ballroom, his desired ballroom.

Juliette Kayyem:

Yes.

Geoff Bennett:

Do you think the administration is treating this primarily as a security failure to fix or as a political moment to message around?

Juliette Kayyem:

I mean, I was thinking about the past week.

I take presidential assassinations seriously, as we all should. And I sort of think about the line of the story since last Saturday, which is, it's very scary for a democracy to have people, and people with whatever motives, but in this case left-wing motives, to go after a president.

So you have discussion of a ballroom. You have going after Comey, the FBI director. And then you have going after a late-night host for what he said about the president. None of those are related to the president's safety and security. And I think the White House might make all of us take security more seriously if they did not politicize it within hours of an assassination attempt against the president of the United States.

Geoff Bennett:

Juliette Kayyem.

Juliette, thanks, as always.

Juliette Kayyem:

Thank you.