BUTLER SHOOTING INVESTIGATIONS IGNORE JILL BIDEN’S PITTSBURGH SPEECH HOURS BEFORE TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT

SECRET SERVICE ADMITS STAFFING IRREGULARITIES ALLOWED SHOOTER TO PENETRATE SECURITY PERIMETER, NO INFO ON HOW FIRST LADY’S LAST MINUTE EVENT CHANGED USSS PITTSBURGH FIELD OFFICE RESPONSE

As the two-year anniversary of one of the most significant events in President Trump’s amazing life approaches, the question remains: “Who made the decision to divert the [Secret Service] resources to Jill Biden’s event?”

It was just about two years ago that I Substacked about the unusual circumstances around Jill Biden’s brief speech in Pittsburgh only an hour before the attempted assassination of President Trump by Thomas Crooks in nearby Butler, Pennsylvania. And now, after several investigations, hearings, and reports, questions raised by me and Real Clear Investigations reporter Susan Crabtree remain officially unanswered.

What is clear is that Secret Service staffing issues in Butler allowed Crooks unobstructed access to his sniper’s position. Added to that were communications missteps that withheld critical intelligence from President Trump’s protective detail as local law enforcement responded to multiple alerts about a suspicious person.

Trump, as reported by author Salena Zito, who had a front row seat to the shooting, describes his close call as “an act of God.” I grant him that, but my suspicions of what the Biden White House did to overburden the Secret Service Pittsburgh Field Office remain.

Remember, it was on June 27th, 2024, that Trump, in that momentous debate, authoritatively revealed to the world that Joe Biden was a fraudulent president. Utter White House panic ensued. And then came what I think was the counter attack. First, the Trump campaign announced on the evening of July 3rd their event in Butler. That was followed soon after by the Biden White House, planning but not immediately announcing, Jill Biden’s event in Pittsburgh.

First of all, here’s a link to my archived Substack, which nails down the disturbing timeline the Biden White House put in motion. It’s viewable, of course, for my paying subscribers. And that makes this the right time to recommend a paid subscription.

Now, here’s a telling quote from that two-year-old Substack:

“Did the Biden White House intentionally set a Jill Biden event in Pittsburgh as a way to draw Secret Service and site security resources way from former President Trump’s rally in nearby Butler, Pennsylvania?

“Given the timing of how Dr. Biden’s event was rolled out, it sure looks that way to me.

“Here’s a screenshot of the White House press release that announced Jill Biden’s trip to Pittsburgh on the evening of Saturday, July 13th, to address the Italian Sons and Daughters of America dinner. Note the date is July 10th, and the time is 11:58 a.m. Pre-credentialed media had but two days to sign up to accompany her. Judging by the lack of pool reports, it appears she traveled without a press contingent.”

Yes, I provide a screenshot of that press release in that Substack, plus quotes of her speech as published on the BidenWhiteHouse.archives.gov. That two-year-old article is worth a read, though without broader official inquiry and coverage, it becomes what Grok calls “conspiracy”.

So, here’s the latest. On June 30th, the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General issued its findings on the security lapses. Wouldn’t you know it bounced right over any understanding of why President Trump’s protective detail was so overwhelmed at Butler. No mention, of course, of the last minute scramble the Pittsburgh Field Office had to accomplish to protect First Lady Jill Biden. I laid much of that out two years ago.

In my opinion, the best information in the DHSOIG report was when it footnoted other previous reports. Here’s a screenshot of one page I found to be pertinent, especially the phrase “lacked manpower”.

But that’s as far as Congress went.

What to do? What to do? Why can’t any “official” source raise a question about the Bidens? Heck, I’ll ask Grok, specifically what the whistleblowers said. And here’s where we get past the fluff.

Here I am quoting Grok:

“Whistleblower details on Secret Service (USSS) handling of the July 13, 2024, Trump rally in Butler, PA, primarily center on resource/staffing shortages and their potential link to concurrent demands, including the NATO summit and First Lady Jill Biden’s Pittsburgh event. These come mainly from anonymous disclosures to congressional committees (notably the House Judiciary Committee) and reporting by Susan Crabtree of RealClearPolitics, supported by internal emails. They are contested by the Secret Service and form part of broader investigations into security failures, but they are not the sole focus of official reports (which emphasize planning, communications, and perimeter issues). judiciary.house.gov

“Key Claims from Whistleblowers

“1. House Judiciary Committee Disclosures (Rep. Jim Jordan, July 18, 2024)

“Whistleblowers told the committee that the USSS lacked “proper resources” for Trump’s Butler rally due to staffing shortages caused by:

• The NATO summit in Washington, D.C. (July 9-11, 2024), which heavily taxed agency personnel.

• First Lady Jill Biden’s event in Pittsburgh the same day as the Butler rally.
  judiciary.house.gov

“Specific detail: At a July 8, 2024, briefing/meeting with the FBI, Western Pennsylvania Fusion Center, and other law enforcement partners (to discuss security for both Trump’s Butler rally and Jill Biden’s Pittsburgh event), USSS Special Agent in Charge (SAC) Tim Burke (Pittsburgh Field Office) reportedly stated that the USSS had “limited resources” that week because the agency was covering the NATO summit. nypost.com

“Jordan’s letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray posed direct questions, including:

• Was the security posture at Trump’s event limited due to resource constraints from the NATO Summit and/or Jill Biden’s Pittsburgh event?

• How did communications breakdowns affect threat identification?

• Other details on coordination, buildings needing securing, and the unsecured AGR building roof. judiciary.house.gov

“2. Susan Crabtree/RealClearPolitics Reporting (Citing Sources and Emails) Crabtree reported (based on unnamed Secret Service community sources) that resources/personnel were stretched or diverted, following agency protocol that prioritized the sitting First Lady over a former president/candidate._newsweek.com

“Documentary support via internal USSS emails obtained/referenced:

• Email subject: “203.080

“First Lady Dr. Jill Biden to Pittsburgh, PA” — Listed 12 personnel selected for temporary assignment as post-standers (agents for static/security positions) in support of Jill Biden’s July 13 dinner.

• Email subject: “203.080

“Candidate Donald Trump to Pittsburgh, PA” — Listed only 3 personnel for post-standers in support of Trump’s event. realclearpolitics.com

“Sources expressed frustration over understaffing at the Trump rally (e.g., reliance on supplemental agents from other field offices, overworked regular detail, and reportedly limited counter-snipers). Sen. Chuck Grassley referenced similar post-stander emails in oversight letters, requesting full counts and totals for both events (noting the provided info was incomplete). realclearpolitics.com

“Context and Broader Picture

• Timing and Overlap: Both events occurred the same day in western Pennsylvania (~35 miles apart). Planning meetings explicitly covered both.
  Jill Biden’s trip was publicly announced July 10 (detailed schedule July 12 evening); Trump’s rally was a known campaign stop.

• Agency-Wide Strain: The USSS has long acknowledged staffing challenges. The NATO summit added acute pressure. Post-standers are one component of security (static posts); overall protective details, counter-snipers, and advance planning involve more layers.

• Protocol Differences: Different threat assessments and resource norms apply to current officials (President/First Lady) vs. former presidents/candidates. The Secret Service has denied improper “diversion” from Trump’s detail to Jill Biden’s, attributing issues to broader constraints and standard procedures.

“Credibility, Corroboration, and Limitations

“Strengths/Corroboration:

• Emails provide concrete (if partial) documentary evidence of the numerical disparity in post-standers.

• Committee disclosures add specificity (e.g., Tim Burke’s reported July 8 statement).

• Multiple outlets and lawmakers (Jordan, Grassley) have referenced these claims, prompting oversight letters and questions.

• Aligns with admitted agency strains and some broader findings on resource allocation.

“Limitations/Counterpoints:

• Whistleblowers are anonymous (common in such cases for protection).

• Secret Service has pushed back on “diversion” claims specifically tied to Jill Biden’s event.

• Official investigations (House Task Force, Senate reports, DHS OIG, independent panel) highlight multiple failures—communications breakdowns (e.g., missed local radio traffic), perimeter decisions (AGR building outside secure area), advance planning gaps, and local-federal coordination issues—as central. Resource shortages are noted as a contributing factor in some contexts but not proven as the decisive “diversion” causing the breach.

• Post-stander counts do not represent the total security footprint (regular details, other personnel, local law enforcement support).

“Overall Assessment

“These whistleblower details paint a picture of an overstretched agency juggling high-demand events (NATO + dual Pennsylvania protectee movements), leading to thinner coverage at the higher-threat outdoor Trump rally. The disparity in post-standers and Burke’s reported comments lend credibility to claims of resource constraints tied to the concurrent schedule. However, they represent one piece of a larger puzzle of systemic and operational shortcomings rather than a standalone “smoking gun” for the security failure. Congressional probes treated them seriously enough to question agencies directly, while the Secret Service maintains no improper reallocation occurred. Later developments (suspensions of some Pittsburgh Field Office personnel, including figures like Burke in administrative roles, broader reforms) reflect ongoing accountability efforts. Full classified operational records would provide more clarity, but public evidence supports real strains without conclusively proving targeted diversion as the primary cause over other documented lapses.If you have specific documents, quotes, or aspects of the testimony (e.g., a particular article or hearing excerpt) to focus on, provide more details for deeper analysis.”

Thanks, Grok. Excellent summary.

And here’s more on Susan Crabtree’s great work, a substantial amount of which I present in my archived Substack. And I will add that while Grok trusts the Secret Service communications office, I don’t. That office went to great lengths during Biden’s presidency to withhold information on the movements of the Biden Crime Family during a key weekend in Wilmington in April 2014. I went into detail on how I dealt with them in my Case to Impeach Joe Biden book. I know they have to be circumspect, but the Secret Service should be arresting criminals, not be covering for them.

This screenshot offers more Grok analysis of “official” sources:

As someone who traveled with Joe and Jill Biden during his vice presidency and am familiar with his inner circle, I state with confidence her event was a direct rebuttal of Trump’s rally. In their mind, it was politics, and politics is war. Was Jill’s speech scheduled to endanger Trump after he had destroyed Joe in that debate?

In my opinion, that’s affirmative.

Knowing Biden and his inner circle, I can say they would know how the Secret Service operates. And yes, they would know that a First Lady trip, on the heels of a major D.C. international event, would strain an already taxed protective detail which needed extensive backup from the Pittsburgh Field Office. How that knowledge fits in with the suicide-by-cop rampage by Thomas Crooks is the real question no one is ready to broach publicly.

The blind spot, and it remains a blind spot, is: Who was Thomas Crooks and what was he doing in the final six months of his life? And more importantly, how did Thomas Crooks have the resources and planning capability to wound a presidential candidate and two spectators and murder Corey Comperatore?

Our official investigations have produced some results, but not those. Given the tumultuous times we live in, I think answers to those questions and the Biden White House scheduling decisions leading up to the attempted assassination of President Trump are yet a long, long way off.

Thanks to all my paid subscribers. More on the way.