Security contributor: "We are facing the most complex threat environment" in U.S. history

[0:00] We turn now to Samantha Vinograt. She was a top Homeland Security official in the Biden [0:03] administration and is now a national security contributor here at CBS. And A.T. Smith is a [0:09] former deputy director of the Secret Service and now a CBS law enforcement analyst and joins us [0:14] from Greenville, South Carolina. Good to have you both here. Sam, you were in the room with us, [0:21] sheltering with some of our colleagues. As I understand it, you were close to the perimeter [0:28] and able to detect some of what was happening. I was struck. National Guard was there. Secret [0:34] Service was there. Private security was there. National Guard was there. The perimeter of the [0:38] security went out pretty darn far. There were protests surrounding the building. There weren't [0:43] just protests about Trump. There were protests around Jeffrey Epstein or protests about the [0:47] corporation that owns this news network. There were protests about the Iran war. How did you [0:55] assess the security situation last night? Well, Margaret, I think a lot of us are waking up this [1:00] morning and asking the basic question of is anywhere safe? And the reality is that in this country, [1:06] we are facing the most complex threat environment in our nation's history, in particular from lone [1:12] actors, individuals who radicalized to violence, often online. In this scenario, two things can be [1:18] true. It can be true that law enforcement and intelligence professionals prepared exhaustively for last [1:24] night. Weeks of planning, intelligence gathering, physical security barriers, officers on site. [1:30] But it can also be true that in this moment, in this security environment, the paradigms of the past [1:37] may not be sufficient to meet the moment. And with that in mind, security professionals, [1:42] as well as private citizens, need to rethink what it is going to take to actually secure these mass [1:48] gatherings where there are so many protectees and what it's going to take to secure communities. [1:52] It's frightening. I mean, AT, we're in a room with the most heavily guarded man in the world. And yet [2:02] this happened. The acting attorney general said the system worked. In your view, did the system work? [2:11] The system did work in terms of what the Secret Service trains to do every day when it comes to [2:16] covering and evacuating a protectee. And as you saw, the security plan there [2:21] had the scenario where the president and the vice president exited different ways. They exited in [2:27] different ways than the normal folks had come into the gathering. Having said that, the Secret Service, [2:35] as I've said many times, no one is more critical of themselves than the Secret Service. So they're going [2:41] to have to look at this very diligently in terms of this individual, how he was able to run that [2:49] magnetometer as he did and get as close as he did with two firearms. That is not acceptable. And they [2:55] will have to try to figure that part out and, you know, see what the intelligence and the investigation is [3:03] going to bring in terms of what this individual's history was. And then, as you said earlier, Margaret, [3:08] try to figure out exactly how he got those guns into the hotel. Did he avoid, as you said, you know, [3:16] taking an airplane to get there and by using a train and so forth, was able to secrete them in some [3:22] way and get them there. So it's a tough thing. The Secret Service was very successful in how they did [3:28] that. And as Sam said, the perimeter around the hotel was exhausted. But again, anytime you have a [3:36] breach like this, you've just got to address it and be your worst, you know, critic. [3:41] You know, A.T., I was speaking with some of our producers before the program. Many of us have traveled [3:48] with the president in the past and past presidents and other high level officials. When the president goes [3:52] overseas or the vice president, they typically take over an entire hotel. Secret Service really locks the [3:57] place down. That didn't happen last night here on U.S. soil. Is that the kind of thing we're going to start [4:03] seeing that it'll be more sort of like an Israeli model? You may have to. Particularly, you know, it's difficult because you have, [4:12] obviously, a hotel that's open to the public. They have other guests that are unassociated with [4:17] the event last night. And they are going to have to take a hard look at how you maybe screen those [4:23] guests coming in. It's very hard to necessarily know everything about everybody that's there. But [4:29] probably one safety scenario would be what you just said to more or less lock down the hotel. We don't [4:37] normally do that in the United States. And usually the Secret Service is very successful at [4:42] coordinating and sort of corralling that area like the ballroom that's, you know, going to be used for [4:48] the event and making it secure. But again, they'll have to take a look at that. And I said also that, [4:54] you know, this was not a national special security event, but the planning preparation, the weeks of [5:00] work really align it to that kind of a security plan. So I'm sure in terms of parameters, that was all done. [5:07] Sam, I think you make such a great point, which is essentially you can't protect against [5:15] the unexpected, right? You can't protect against everything. We've talked about this, though. I mean, [5:20] as parents, as human beings, and being in that room, so many of those lawmakers, so many of those [5:28] journalists are dehumanized. They are attacked online. They are attacking each other. You have a [5:35] high level of animosity in the public space. People were united, and the president said he wasn't wrong [5:43] in using that word, because they were all scared of what was going to happen next. [5:48] I don't know how we solve for that as a society, because it seems to have really seeped in to our [5:57] politics and to our conversations. I mean, it is just the new normal. [6:04] Every time an incident like this happens, the optimist in me thinks perhaps this will be a [6:10] turning point. Perhaps this will be a turning point where each and every person in this country [6:14] thinks about what they say and how they act. Words do matter, certainly. At the same time, [6:20] whenever an incident like this happens, and I say this, Margaret, as a mother and as a security [6:24] professional, I hope that it is also a wake-up call to law enforcement professionals to rethink [6:30] whether additional steps are needed, like perhaps screening guests coming into a public venue at a mass [6:35] gathering with a lot of protectees, but that it is also a wake-up call to every person in this country to [6:41] understand that they have a role to play in our homeland security. While law enforcement looks at [6:46] whether additional protocols are needed at various sites, every viewer, every person in this country [6:51] needs to say something when they see something. An individual in their circle, at their workplace, [6:56] in their family is demonstrating signs that they could be going down a pathway to violence. [7:01] They need to ask for help from a law enforcement professional or other trained official, and we need to [7:06] really devote all the resources that we can to ensuring that the integration between state and [7:11] local and federal officials is not just where it was before, but tighter than ever so that we can try [7:18] to prevent these incidents from happening in the future. Sam, I'm glad you're safe. I'm glad you're with us. [7:23] A.T., thank you very much for your insights.