Election infrastructure has ‘never been more secure,’ CISA chief says
ABC News
(Washington, D.C.) — With less than a week before the 2024 presidential election, the infrastructure has “never been more secure,” according to the head of the federal agency tasked with America’s cyber defense.
Jen Easterly, the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), told ABC News’ Chief Justice Correspondent Pierre Thomas that she has “incredible confidence” in the security of the election.
“I understand why some Americans have questions, because they’ve been subjected for years to a fire hose of disinformation, and it has undermined confidence in the election systems and in our democratic institutions, but I have spent so much time on the ground over the past three plus years with state and local election officials who are on the front lines of running and managing and defending election infrastructure, and I can tell you, I have incredible confidence that our election infrastructure has never been more secure,” Easterly said during an interview at CISA headquarters.
“Election officials have never been better prepared to deliver safe and secure and free and fair elections for the people,” she said.
For example, she said that 97% of registered voters will cast a ballot in jurisdictions where they’ll get a paper record that they themselves can verify, which is “incredibly important,” she said.
Voting machines are not connected to the internet and that is a “great source of protection.”
That disinformation is being amplified by foreign adversaries, according to Easterly, who pointed to various examples of disinformation already being debunked — such as a fake video of ballots being destroyed in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.
She said foreign adversaries have two goals: to undermine American confidence in the election and sow discord in the country.
“Within a day, the federal government used our tools, our forensic analysis, to affirm that it was a fake video, that it was a Russian manufactured video,” she said. “So at the end of the day, we are going to lean very far forward when we see inaccurate information that could undermine Americans trust in elections.”
CISA is also responsible for advising election officials on the physical security of their election.
“As a retired Army officer, as a combat veteran who has been in very dangerous places where we’ve had flak jackets and, you know, we’ve been behind layers of security, it is disconcerting to me, as an American, to see election offices with bulletproof glass and panic buttons and barbed wire fences,” Easterly said. “That’s not the way it should be in America, and we know that these threats, harassment, bullying, swatting, threats of violence to election officials and their families, election officials of both parties largely stemming from unfounded claims that the 2020 election was rigged.”
She said election workers are not “faceless bureaucrats,” but rather friends and neighbors.
“They’re not doing it for pay or for glory. They’re doing it because they believe in our democracy, and they deserve respect, they deserve gratitude, and they deserve to be safe,” she said,
The director said recent incidents such as the ballot boxes being set on fire in Oregon and Washington and the denial of service attack against the Georgia Secretary of State’s office are expected to happen but voters should be assured there is no impact on their elections.
“What Americans should understand is these incidents will not impact the security or integrity of votes being cast or those votes being counted as cast. And election officials have trained for this, they’ve exercised for it, they’ve prepared for this – all manner of scenarios, whether it’s ballots that need to be replaced or cyber security threats that need to be dealt with, or for criminal activity like fraudulent registrations that need to be investigated And the perpetrators held criminally accountable. Election officials are prepared for this. They’re ready for this to meet this moment.”
(WASHINGTON) — House Speaker Mike Johnson said on Friday that he does not think the House Ethics Committee should release the findings of its investigation into Matt Gaetz, now that the Florida Republican is no longer a member of Congress.
“I believe it is very important to maintain the House’s tradition of not issuing ethics reports on people who are no longer members of Congress,” Johnson said. “I think it would open a Pandora’s box.”
Johnson weighing into the issue is extremely rare as House speakers traditionally stay out of the committee’s investigations and business.
Just two days ago, Johnson said the following about the report: “As far as the timing of the release of a report, or something, I don’t know. The speaker of the House is not involved in that, can’t be involved in that.”
It’s unclear what the bipartisan panel will do now with its report. There are growing calls from senators on both sides of the aisle for the report to be released.
The House Ethics Committee, which sources said was preparing to meet this week to deliberate over whether to release a final report, was now not expected to meet on Friday, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
Gaetz stepped down from the House shortly after being tapped by President-elect Donald Trump to be attorney general — a choice that shocked some Republican lawmakers and many Justice Department officials. Gaetz will need to be confirmed by the Senate to serve in the role.
Asked on Friday if he spoke to Trump about the ethics investigation, Johnson sidestepped.
“I’m not talking to anybody about what I have said to Trump,” he said.
Johnson also claimed he was responding to public reports about the panel’s findings and had not been briefed on the investigation.
“The speaker has no involvement or understanding of what’s going on with the Ethics Committee or what they’re investigating or when,” Johnson added.
“What I am saying is someone who is no longer a member of Congress. You’re not in the business of investigating and publishing a report,” he concluded. “I would encourage the House Ethics Committee to follow that tradition. I think it’s important.”
(NEW YORK) — The Republican Nebraska lawmaker who effectively helped kill an 11th-hour push to make the winner of the state receive all of the Electoral College votes on Election Day — a move that would have likely benefited former President Donald Trump in a tight race with Vice President Kamala Harris — told ABC News Prime Anchor Linsey Davis that effort “did not seem fair.”
“I’m always willing to listen to people and try to find a compromise, but also try to understand why they’re voting yes … But this just did not seem fair. If we’re going to go ahead and change [the rules] in the state of Nebraska, I think we should do it mid-term. I think we should do it two years before the presidential election,” Nebraska State Sen. Mike McDonnell told Davis on Tuesday of the timing around a potential law change.
The potential winner-take-all electoral change would have been pivotal if the Republican-leaning state then allocated all of its five electoral votes solely to Trump if he won statewide, instead of dividing them with Harris if she won in one of Nebraska’s three congressional districts. Nebraska gives three Electoral College votes to the statewide winner and one to the winner of each congressional district.
Earlier this week, McDonnell, who was one of three state Republican holdouts that Gov. Jim Pillen needed to break an expected filibuster in a special legislative session, said he would not support the change before November. This announcement effectively killed the winner-take-all push.
Instead, McDonnell said he believed the legislature should take up the issue in next year’s legislative session, which tentatively starts the first week of January 2025.
“We do listen, as Nebraskans, and sometimes people say, oh, ‘Nebraska nice,’ that means, you know, you’re kind of weak — and it’s not. We work hard and we play by the rules and we’re just asking everyone to come in, work hard in Omaha, the 2nd Congressional District, and play by the rules,” McDonnell said Tuesday.
McDonnell mentioned that he had been opposed previously to “winner-take-all” in the state since he ran for legislature starting in 2016.
Pressed by Davis if anyone or anything could make him change his decision, McDonnell was resolute: “No. I’ve tried to listen and I always will listen. I think the rest of the country should follow us and look at the unicameral [Nebraska Legislature] and look at getting rid of the winner-take-all.”
Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen later released a statement Tuesday confirming he has “no plans” to call a special session before the November general election.
Trump on Monday thanked Pillen for attempting to “simplify the complexity” of the state’s electoral map, while attacking McDonnell for opposing it, calling him a “Grandstander.”
“Unfortunately, a Democrat turned Republican(?) State Senator named Mike McDonnell decided, for no reason whatsoever, to get in the way of a great Republican, common sense, victory. Just another ‘Grandstander!'” Trump wrote in a social media post.
Meanwhile, Harris’ running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, while speaking at a New York fundraiser on Monday night, celebrated McDonnell’s decision, saying that the race would be close because the “Electoral College is the way it is,” before stating, “Thank God for that one guy in Omaha” — a reference to McDonnell.
Asked to respond to Trump’s comments, McDonnell said, “Well, today’s the first day I’ve talked to the media and I’m always willing to get, as I said, over the last eight years, serving in the legislature – willing to talk to people and listen.”
And asked about Walz’s comments and if Harris and Trump should make campaign stops in Omaha — as well as if his own decision may have changed the outcome of the election — McDonnell stayed away from making any predictions, but invited them both to Omaha.
“I’m inviting both Vice President Harris and President Trump. Come to Omaha. Come have a debate here! There’s still 42 days. Listen to the people. Talk to the people and answer the questions,” McDonnell said.
McDonnell emphasized that most — if not all — of the feedback he had gotten about the issue had been civil.
“We know it’s a very important issue. It’s a passionate issue, and people are passionate about it … 90% of them have been professional and polite,” McDonnell told Davis.
(WASHINGTON) — The Secret Service failed to make clear decisions and did not communicate properly with local law enforcement or provide necessary resources that caused “foreseeable, preventable” security failings on July 13, when a would-be assassin opened fire on former President Donald Trump’s rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, according to a new Senate committee report.
The highly anticipated interim report was released by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee by both Republicans and Democrats and reflects the work of the committee since it opened its probe following the Butler attack.
This report focuses on the Butler shooting and does not extend to investigatory efforts launched after a separate second assassination attempt on the former president at his golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida, earlier this month.
Since the Butler attack, acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe has acknowledged that the event was a “failure” by the agency, but the committee, which interviewed multiple Secret Service personnel, found that individuals “declined to acknowledge individual areas of responsibility for planning or security as having contributed to the failure to prevent the shooting that day, even when as an agency, the USSS has acknowledged ultimate responsibility for the failure to prevent the former president of the United States from being shot.”
On a call with reporters, Senate Homeland Security Chairman Gary Peters pointed to several failures by the Secret Service.
“Every single one of those failures was preventable and the consequences of those failures were dire,” Peters said. “This was the first assassination attempt of a former president and the presidential candidate in more than four decades.”
Peters was joined on the call by committee ranking member Rand Paul, R-Ky., Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations Chairman Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., ranking member on the investigations subcommittee.
“Whoever was in charge of security on the day of Butler, whoever’s in charge of security during the recent assassination attempt, those people can’t be in charge. They there’s so many human errors,” Paul said. “No amount of money that you give to Secret Service is going to alleviate the human errors if you leave the same humans in charge who made these terrible, dramatic mistakes with regard to security.”
On Friday, the Secret Service released a four-page Mission Assurance Report, which affirms many of the findings in the committee’s report, but the committee report offers additional details from interviews with USSS and local officials.
As part of the investigation, the committee interviewed Secret Service agents, as well as the Secret Service counter snipers that were at the rally.
A closer look at the roof of the building where shots were fired from
The Senate report pays special attention to the American Glass Research building from where Thomas Matthew Crooks fired, and unveils new details about the timeline of events on that day.
In the lead-up to the event, local law enforcement raised concerns about the building. The report finds that the line of sight from the AGR building plagued rally planning and that it was identified as a concern, but that no steps were taken to mitigate the threat. Trees obstructed the view of the sniper team that was positioned atop one of the nearby roofs.
The Secret Service initially began planning for the rally in early July with state and local law enforcement. The planning meetings lacked answers or a general plan, according to the report.
A Butler County Emergency Services Unit commander told the committee the July 11 site walkthrough was “incredibly disorganized” with “no coordination,” and said he felt like “there was really no plan.”
When the USSS counter sniper team leader did a walkthrough of the area, he told the committee he “wasn’t independently looking at the threat areas,” but rather making sure the roofs were safe for law enforcement to stand on.
The leader assumed that if there were an issue with one of the lines of sight with a sniper position, that counter sniper would have told the head of the unit.
Agents from the Secret Service were notified of a suspicious person with a rangefinder 27 minutes before shots were fired, but that information was not relayed to senior Secret Service leaders on the ground.
Three minutes before shots were fired, local law enforcement communicated over the radio that someone was on the roof of the AGR building. The information was passed to the Secret Service two minutes before Crooks fired. A local officer said there was someone armed on the roof 22 seconds before shots were fired, but that information wasn’t passed on to the Secret Service.
Secret Service counter snipers did see local law enforcement running towards the AGR building with their guns drawn, but did not alert the former president’s protective detail.
“At that time, we didn’t know what we were working with,” a USSS counter sniper told the committee.
Though counter sniper efforts ultimately failed to prevent Crooks from firing, the Senate report finds that Trump’s Butler rally was the first time that a USSS counter sniper team was assigned to a protectee who was not the president, vice president, or formally nominated party nominee. Snipers were only at the rally in response to “credible intelligence” of a threat. Though the committee did not identify what that threat was, sources have told ABC News that Iran has targeted the former president since the killing of General Soliemani.
When the Secret Service sniper took his shot at Crooks, he did so “mere seconds” after identifying him, his partner told the committee.
Officers told the committee they didn’t get resources they needed
Rowe has repeatedly asserted publicly that no assets were denied for the Butler rally. But some of the committee’s findings suggest otherwise.
The operator of the USSS counter drone measures, known as C-UAS, told the committee he requested additional C-UAS equipment and personnel in the 11 days before the rally. However, these requests were denied, at times without explanation, according to the report.
The USSS lead advance agent told the committee Trump’s Secret Service detail requested counter assault team liaisons to help coordinate tactical assets in advance of the July 13 rally, but USSS denied this request, the report found.
When the CUAS system went down, the agent who was responsible for it called the manufacturer hotline to start troubleshooting the problem, delaying the deployment of the system for hours.
Previous testimony from the acting director stated that Crooks flew a drone over the rally site during the few hours the CUAS system was down.
Secret Service communications and those of local law enforcement were “siloed” in real time, according to the committee’s report.
Those issues included inoperable radios — in one instance, the head of the Pittsburgh Field Office gave his radio to the lead advance agent on the ground because his radio wasn’t working. These types of problems were commonplace, according to the report.
At one point, some of the agent’s communications were getting crossed with those of the detail of first lady Jill Biden, who was nearby.
Blumenthal called the Secret Service’s lack of accountability an “Abbott and Costello” routine, making reference to the infamous “Who’s on First” skit.
“It was really truth being stranger than fiction,” Blumenthal said of the finger-pointing as to who was responsible and who was in charge of the Butler event.
Committee leaders stress that the report is an interim set of findings meant to be expanded upon by further lines of questioning.
Blumenthal also called for new leadership at the Secret Service.
Peters told reporters last week that there have been instances in which agencies were not as responsive to committee requests as he would’ve liked.
Though the committee staff examined “over 2,800 pages” of documents provided by USSS and transcribed 12 interviews with USSS personnel, the report does reflect instances in which agencies did not meet committee requests.
“The majority of documents provided by the USSS and DHS are heavily redacted. This has unnecessarily hindered the Committee’s ability to carry out its constitutional authority to investigate and acquire information necessary to identify needed reforms,” the report says.
