Why is government doing everything it can to destroy individual sovereignty?

If there is one thing that we have learned through the course of all of human history is sticking our big, fat nose in other people’s business always works.  And number two, best path to peace, strongly worded letter or like the UN or something like that or maybe a meaningful walk and chat on the beach, a.k.a. diplomacy.

That’s why the president was in San Francisco yesterday, the home of peace, to tout his diplomatic efforts in the Middle East.  Here he is:

VIDEO

President Obama:  We’re testing diplomacy.  We’re not resorting immediately to military conflict.

He looks almost like Patton there, doesn’t he, with the big flag?  We’re testing?  There’s no reason to test diplomacy.  The history of peace through diplomacy speaks for itself.  Adolf Hitler when he called off his plans for world domination after a pleasant phone conversation with Neville Chamberlain worked out really well, or the Iranian Revolution being averted when a sweet-talking Jimmy Carter formed an unlikely friendship with the Shah of Iran.

And of course we all saw the movie with William Wallace.  He gave a great speech about Scotland’s freedom on the battlefield, and that I think was what softened King Edward’s heart, and instead of a bloody battle, our history books celebrate the great piece picnics at Stirling Bridge and Falkirk that secured Scotland’s freedom, I think.

So don’t believe all of those peace through strength nut jobs.  It’s all about diplomacy.  The New York Times I read today, and I about had an aneurysm.  They’re very excited about the president’s new strategy.  They say in The New York Times, watch this, “It also reflects a broader scaling back of the use of American muscle…,” remember that, “…not least in the Middle East…,” remember that, “…as well as a willingness…,” you’re going to love this one, “…to deal with foreign governments as they are rather than push for new leaders the better embody American values.”

I wish any of that were true, any of that.  None of that is true.  A willingness to deal with other governments as they are?  We should ask some of those governments.  I tell you what, Tiffany, can you get Muammar Gaddafi on the phone?  Oh, crap, that’s right, Muammar Gaddafi, what was it Hillary said?

VIDEO

Hillary Clinton:  We saw, he died.

That’s right, can’t ask him, we killed him.  That’s right, I remember.  So maybe we’ll just go – Tiffany, get somebody from Assad’s regime on the phone in Syria.  Oh no, Assad, currently the president is trying to drum up support to go and bomb the snot out of him, and we’re giving aid and weapons to jihadis to overthrow him.

Well, maybe we could get Mubarak on the phone.  I mean, no, he’s on trial.  Well, maybe he has a phone in the jail, because after all, the Obama administration helped incite a violent revolution against him.  Boy, that sounds kind of more muscle-ish than scaling back to me, which is weird, because it also doesn’t sound like we get along with anybody either.

Let me make it really, really clear.  I think scaling back our military in the Middle East is probably a really good idea, not the worst one I’ve heard.  In fact, I would say that the whole progressive idea that started with Teddy Roosevelt to spread democracy around the world is one of the worst ideas ever.  I may have been sluggish enough to go, “Yeah, well everybody loves us,” 15 years ago.  Hello?  Have we not spent enough treasure and blood around the world?  Has the last decade not taught us anything?

We have to be a strong, non-isolationist, noninterventionist kind of country, strong.  Here’s what I mean by that: You come over, you fly some planes into our buildings, we bomb the bat snot out of you and go home.  We kill the bad guys who did it and go home.  What are we still doing in Afghanistan?  I believe, I for one, maybe not you, it is well past time to announce that this progressive idea, be it from John McCain or George Bush, Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, that we need to nation build and be the world’s policeman is dead and possibly the worst idea America has ever had.

But let me take you back to sugarplum fairy pop land of The New York Times.  They go from the front page into this.  Let me take you to Saudi Arabia, because for a guy, a president who’s hooked on diplomacy, doesn’t it seem like our president is converting all of our friends into enemies?  Not that I was ever a big fan of George W. Bush taking the long strolls at his Crawford ranch holding hands with the Saudi princes.  Boy, I don’t miss those days.  That was creepy.

But you also have to be a realist, and before you start cutting off your friends and making them enemies, you might want to look at your own situation here.  For instance, energy prices are up 42 percent in a decade.  Okay, well maybe we should start exploring for our own, because getting into bed with these guys isn’t good.  And now that it’s up 42 percent, it doesn’t seem wise to really disconnect from the cheapest source of oil in the world, unless you have something to replace it with.  It’s also our second highest source of foreign oil.

So does this make sense to you?  It doesn’t me, but it does to The New York Times, because here’s their rationale, and I love it:  “At the same time, new sources of oil have made the Saudis less essential.”  Same time, new sources of oil made the Saudis…what new sources of oil?  I mean, serious question, anybody on the set, anybody know of a new source of oil that we’ve had?

It’s not Canada.  Keystone pipeline went up.  President blocked that one.  More drilling permits in the gulf?  No, huh uh.  Alaska?  No, huh uh.  Where is this magical fount of oil that has sprouted up?  Have little oil rigs just started to grow in the west lawn in place of the first lady’s veggie garden?  I’m not really sure.

America, I want us to break up with the Saudis.  I want Israel to take care of itself.  I want to be out of the business of everybody else.  But not standing with the only person that understands capitalism in the entire region while pissing off the Saudis really doesn’t seem like good news, you know?  Breaking up with Israel, not so much.  Our overseas policies matter, especially when your policies here don’t match.

You want to break up with the rest of the world, fine, but you have to be self-sufficient.  We’re cutting ourselves off from energy suppliers while at the same time diminishing our own access to affordable allergy.  Hello?  Hello?  Hello?  Oh yeah, but we’re going to go green.  Stop with the green nonsense.  Maybe someday, not today.  Another green company that the president invested your money in just went bankrupt, cost you $139 million.  Why are we doing this?  If green energy is so needed, the free market will figure it out.

Okay, so we have no money left.  We’re really whittling down our friends.  We have no oil.  We have no sufficient source of energy to fill in the gap because we’re closing the coal plants.  We won’t drill for oil, and we won’t build a pipeline.  That sounds like energy shortage.  When that comes, oh, and it will, remember this day.

And so what does that mean for you?  Well, when you are not self-sufficient, you are a slave to whomever holds the bag of food or the bag of black gold.  Our sovereignty as a nation will be put aside in order to survive.  Why do you think we take the lead painted toys from China, and we don’t say anything?  Because our hands are tied.  We need their money.

But here’s the good news, national sovereignty begins with personal sovereignty.  This is the secret of America, the more independent you are, the stronger the nation becomes.  If we as people can self-sustain during an energy shortage, a cash shortage, a food shortage, a health care shortage, then you really can tell people like China and Saudi Arabia to go take their oil and shove it.

But that’s another policy that doesn’t matter because this administration is not encouraging people to be self-sufficient.  We are not helping people go into business.  We don’t advise people to store food, save money, protect yourself, get a gun.  No, those people get mocked.  Instead, Progressives have been campaigning to take all of those responsibilities away from you.

Now wait a minute, if our national sovereignty begins with personal sovereignty, I think you just figure something out.  The secret lies with each individual.  I don’t know what your idea is.  It might stink, but it might be the one that saves us.  I don’t know what your solution is.  I don’t even know the problem you’re working on trying to solve, but you’ll figure it out.

Governments make it worse.  I contend that our government knows where the real source of power comes from.  I mean, how do you miss it?  It’s in big huge block letters in our founding documents, “We the people.”  That’s where the power comes from, the individual American, and that’s why they’re doing everything they can to hobble you.  Look at the attacks on individual sovereignty in our nation.

Last night, we told you about how hospitals are taking custody of your children because the doctors say they know better than you.  So you lose your child, and they can just do that and then issue a gag order so you can’t say anything?  Los Angeles is now considering a ban on feeding the homeless.  Let’s figure this one out.  This is great, from the land of equality.

Listen to this: “If you give out free food on the street with no other services to deal with the collateral damage, you get hundreds of people beginning to squat…,” I love this.  Remember, this is California.  They’re the bighearted people.  “…They’re living in my bushes, and they’re living in my next door neighbor’s crawlspaces.  We have a neighborhood which now seems like a mental ward.”  I just don’t want these people around me.  Well, I’m blown away by your compassion.

This is bogus compassion.  It always is.  Government compassion and progressive compassion is bogus.  The argument sure sounds familiar.  It’s a familiar argument, don’t feed the animals.  Ooh, are animals in cages?  Well, people are animals too, you know?  How about school choice, are we moving towards freedom with the government?  As that thing is collapsing, are they encouraging you?  No, in fact, just the opposite.

They’ve got Common Core, and then off to the side, a really important story that nobody’s paying attention to is the president, his silence on the German family who we’ve had on this program who were granted access to the United States and then denied asylum after they fled Germany because they weren’t allowed to teach their kids in their own home.

Here is an update on that story.  The Supreme Court now has ordered today the administration to respond to the family’s appeal, but I can guarantee you what they’re going to say.  They’re going to say no, send them back.  We’ll give asylum to anyone but not these people.  Why?  Because then the government will be on record saying you have an inherent God-given right to raise your children and teach them the way you see fit.  Government can’t have that.

You now have to purchase a product in order to be considered law-abiding.  Catholic and other religious health care institutions are forced to violate their own beliefs and provide birth control and abortions.  An update on this one too, Supreme Court’s going to take another look at that issue.

From the level that you set your thermostat at to the gas mileage on your cars to the fat content in foods, not being allowed to fish in order to eat unless you have a permit, individual sovereignty is all but dead.  And people are becoming more dependent, and many people like it that way.  We are going the way of Greece, and I have to tell you, we did, and you can find it if you’re a member of TheBlaze.  You can go find it and watch this episode.  I think it was like 40 minutes.  It was six hours on the ground in Greece.

I flew out in the middle of the night, and I just talked to the cab drivers, and I talked to the people on the street.  I watched what was happening.  Things in Greece are getting so bad now that they’re actually inflicting themselves with HIV in order to receive government benefits.  Here’s what it was like about 24 months ago in Greece.

VIDEO

Glenn:  And what does this say?

Male:  It says that we don’t have to live like slaves.  Communism is the revolutionary movement of the ongoing period.  Revolution now.  Let’s produce life and not those things that strangle life.  Let’s not produce those things that strangle life.

Glenn:  Communism is the answer?

Male:  Yes.  It’s the revolutionary movement of the ongoing period.

Glenn:  And the people that are on the street are not drunk.  They’re high, bad heroin highs that we’re seeing on the streets.

Look, it’s a disease in the West, and it kills the human spirit, being a slave to someone else, waiting for the handout, waiting for the government.  It reduces you to a compliant robot unable to think or choose for yourself.  If you have not read this, I just reread this a couple weeks ago.  It’s Anthem by Ayn Rand.  You know, she asked Walt Disney to make this into a movie, and I want to make this into one.

She wanted it to be made into a cartoon, and I want to make it into a cartoon because it’s right.  It’s right.  This is the collective takes over.  You become a robot.  You forget about yourself entirely.  This is why they want to regulate your guns, because they can’t have you stand up.  They can’t.

You know, we put out a book this week, this book.  I don’t care if you go to the bookstore and read this one chapter on Athens, Georgia.  In fact, let me find which chapter it is.  I’m sorry, Athens, Tennessee, I keep saying that.  Battle of Athens is chapter 10, and the Battle of Athens, tomorrow…I’ve sent everybody home from the studios.  So many people are traveling that I’m just going to come in and do the show myself tomorrow.  And I might read this chapter to you.

And I’ve got some things I want to share with you tomorrow on the radio.  It will be a very different radio show.  But the Battle of Athens is happening again.  What happened in Tennessee is happening all over our country, and this gives you the antidote.  It shows you when you rise up and say enough, enough, you do everything right, everything, but they have to make you dependent.

See, the people that tried to take over Athens, Tennessee, the fascists there, they were criminals.  They made everybody dependent, but they forgot one thing, soldiers were returning home from war.  You can’t be dependent on anything or anyone.  To the best of your ability, if you’re not independent now, you’ve got to strive for it.  If you have it, empower someone else so they can achieve it.

This is the era that the American revolutionaries dreamt of.  I’m convinced of it.  They weren’t pining for 1776.  They envisioned a day when man could live a self-reliant life free from all tyranny.  This is it.  The Internet gives us that.  With technology, you don’t have to be chained to your own town.  You don’t have to be chained to somebody else to be a buyer or a distributor.  You don’t even have to go to work and be stuck at one location or a desk or bound by a schedule.

The sky is the limit now for the first time in human history, unless we allow others to put us in a box and close the lid.  There is one uniting principle, and I think George Washington and Thomas Paine shared it.  Now, those who are atheists will say that George Washington was a deist.  I don’t believe that.  I’ve read too much of his words and his letters.

And Christians will say that Thomas Paine wasn’t really an atheist.  They’re wrong.  I’ve read too much of his stuff.  The guy was an early precursor to a Marxist.  But they came together.  If it wasn’t for the two of them, revolution wouldn’t have happened.  They came and found something in common, sovereignty for the individual, maximum personal responsibility, maximum liberty.  When you strip everything else down, I think that’s where most people are, I hope, at least 30% of this country.

And so when you find the religious people that will not oppress and force conformity, will not say my way or the highway or not just playing some game because they believe in the church ruling everybody’s life, and when you find Libertarians who are not anarchists who believe in some government just to be able to protect and defend property and won’t oppress and say none of that religion stuff, when you can get together where common sense and freedom live, where people believe in maximum freedom and maximum personal responsibility, games over.  It’s over.

When you can get to a point where a guy like me, really very religious, and a guy like Penn Jillette, really not religious, can live in the same space, we could be neighbors, and we could be happy neighbors, how do you beat that?  How could Penn Jillette be somebody who hates all people with religion and has a secret plan to put everybody in religion out of business, when I’m one of his good friends?  How could I be a fascist when my good friend is a self-described narco-capitalist?  Something doesn’t compute.

That’s the box that everybody wants to put you in.  Don’t.  Break those molds.  When religious people and nonreligious people can get along, when Ayn Rand and small government Christians can get along, we find the balance, and we understand that the secret is self-regulation.  When we can work together with people we disagree with on some pretty big principles but still have enough points in common to tether ourselves to those principles, and those principles free mankind, it is game over.

5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and two who haven't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

Former President Barack Obama: DID NOT ENDORSE

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November? 

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.